Amos, I agree that there is no easy formula to address this issue, the role of religion in science and that of science in religion. The question I have is does this mean that thought must be exclusive from matter? This wanders into the wispy area of metaphysics that concern philosophers. I think that the duality is subject to furthur investigation to determine whether this is paradoxical or a part of the same thing.

Peace, science is not to be trusted and as a result, scientists who are experts in their field don't trust it but continuously question its validations. It's always relative because as new information unfolds, it changes and adapts very much like the human condition.

I can see a case for religion adapting and changing also in a relativistic state as new ethical and moral considerations are brought to the fore. An example would be how the institutions of religion have changed to embrace new social concerns such as on the position of slavery, women's rights, civil rights, peace activism and the acceptance of new ideas out of the box.

It's hard to imagine the justification of slavery through religion today. As women ascend the pulpit, these sexual-based role identities have changed as well. Today's views do not represent "your father's religion (Oldsmobile). Some have taken the Sermon on the Mount seriously and question whether war is a viable solution to any problem.

I still think that this dialogue must eschew anger and reaction. Personal defensiveness
muddies the waters. I also think that this is a worthwhile topic of discussion.

Frank Hamilton