Talk:Thank God for Evolution

Users who click onto this link and find this stubby article will be disappointed. Should several short book reviews be merged into one big article? Proxima Centauri (talk) 15:26, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

I disagree with this book being characterized or classified as theistic evolution. Dowd accepts evolution completely and only talks about God as a metaphor. He uses religious language to talk about science. He relegates the supernatural as only useful in poetry (Night language) to help our evolved minds understand science. He points out that our minds evolved in order to help us socialize (live in community, plan collective action, etc) with our fellow proto-humans. By picturing the Earth as our mother, we can create in our own minds a relationship with it and then use that relationship to help motivate ourselves to deal with Climate Change. He says that God is a personification not a person. He isn't theist at all. He uses humourous and evocative language and sees uses in deluding ourselves if it helps us overcome the fact that our minds are adapted to the world as it was 10 000 years ago or more rather than as it is now. But he is not a believer in God. He calls himself a creatheist which is a combination of the words creationist and atheist because he believes that the universe is creative not created. But listen to his lectures and you can see that what he means by creative is just a description of what has happened (the Evolutionary Epic or Great Story). Super Novas created heavy elements, Heavy elements created the Earth, the Earth created Opera singers. Up until you get to the opera singers there are no persons in the story. Bluetetrahedron (talk) 18:44, 10 October 2014 (UTC)