...describe the body of thought that accepts Darwinian evolution but with the additional caveats that 1) it was all started by God, 2) had God-worshipping humans as its goal, and 3) that the evidence for all this is that life is complex, humans evolved, and the the “fine tuning” of physical constants of the universe testify to the great improbability of our being here—ergo God.I'm not sure (yet) if I'll use the phrase, as I do like having such a nifty term to describe these or similar beliefs. Unfortunately, the part of me that likes terminology that is both broadly applicable and precise has some objections...
- It seems too narrow in it's list of religious beliefs, which others have already mentioned, and too particular to catch on without evolving another (related) meaning.
- The root term "Creationism" brings to mind the kind of dogmatic science-denial found in young earth creationism, which is contrary to Jerry's new category of religious and scientific belief.
- It isn't all that "new" (which has also been a criticism of the term "New Atheism") and
- just like "New Atheism" it will probably get used more as a derogatory term then as a useful characterization of human belief as plenty of "New Creationists" would probably consider it an insult to be labeled any kind of creationist.
New Creationism differs from intelligent design because it rejects God’s constant intervention in the process of evolution in favor of a Big, One-Time Intervention, and because these ideas are espoused by real scientists like Kenneth Miller and Simon Conway Morris.So what do you think? Like it? Hate it? Do we need it? Can we improve the definition? Will it catch on? Share your thoughts in the comments below.