Stephen Jay Gould made a proposal similar to that of Evans, with his notion of science and religion as constituting two magisteria that need not overlap or come into conflict. And that proposal failed for the same reasons as Evans' which is that religions generally insist upon intruding into the realms that are claimed by science, such as when they pronounce on the creation of the world and of life, or when they make claims concerning miracles. In other words, religions tend to make claims that are susceptible to empirical testing, and which are often found wanting when they are tested.
The proposals of Gould, Evans, and Ruse might work if the major religious faith's were watered down into something like Unitarianism or Ethical Culture. But I am not about to hold my breath, waiting for that to happen anytime soo.
Jim F.
-- Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
Toronto Star - May 23, 2005
Just give me that old-time atheism! By Salman Rushdie
"Not believing in God is no excuse for being virulently anti-religious or naïvely pro-science," says Dylan Evans, a professor of robotics at the University of West England in Bristol.