Although I agree with much of William Provine’s editorial on the incompatibility of science and religion, I believe it goes too far. He equates incompatibility with the religions with which he is familiar with incompatibility with religion itself.

He seems at one point to equate religion with theism. These are not the same thing. Buddhism (in its original form, and still today in Zen) can be characterized as an atheistic or agnostic religion.

He denies free will (because choices are “determined” by heredity and environment). Note that no definition of free will has been provided, and that he implies that the process of choice is well understood. I hope he gives that information to the artificial intelligence community. I’m sure they can use it. He assumes that religion implies “inherent” laws or guiding principles. Some of us consider the process of religion the developing of these principles. Our universe does...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?