Appearing in the New York Times, an article by Robert Wright seeks to bring perspective to the debate between creation and evolution by claiming that both sides are both right and wrong.
Short of bring up an entirely different position he goes on to suggest that there is an amalgamation where both parties both give and take to form a coherent position:
I bring good news! These two warring groups have more in common than they realize. And, no, it isn’t just that they’re both wrong. It’s that they’re wrong for the same reason. Oddly, an underestimation of natural selection’s creative power clouds the vision not just of the intensely religious but also of the militantly atheistic.
If both groups were to truly accept that power, the landscape might look different. Believers could scale back their conception of God’s role in creation, and atheists could accept that some notions of “higher purpose” are compatible with scientific materialism. And the two might learn to get along.
He seems to bring up some interesting ideas about the attitudes of people on both sides of the debate, rather than issues within the debate itself. He calls out both Christians and atheists, pointing out that in some ways there is animosity and white knuckling on both sides by some who are more extreme in their position.
So perhaps this article is more about antipathy than it is about either creation or evolution?