ABSTRACT
Science and religion, according to these definitions, encompass entirely different realms of thought and action, with little or no overlap between them. Since the ascendancy of science, many thinkers have taught that religion and science have nothing in common in their content or mode of interpretation (see, for example, Henri Atlan, E n ligh ten m en t to E n ligh ten m en t: In te r cr it iq u e o f S c ien ce a n d M yth , State University of New York, 1993). Eying each other across the divide, the secular ists have conceded that religion may be a good psychological support for those who need it; the religious, for their part, have conceded that science is a useful instrument, but one that ignores (and even demeans) the true place of humankind in the scheme of the universe. Here, I have greatly simplified the gap between religion and science. There are many differ ent religions and their adherents, even those nominally w ithin the same religion, say many different things. Likewise, different branches of the tree of science provide different views of the world to those who ascend the tree. But in general the two realms, even when not at war, are thought to have well-defended bor ders. The message of this book ( if a book that ambles so can presume to transmit a message) is that the borders are not well marked: The problem with the standard definitions of sci ence and religion is that they ignore a signifi cant overlap between these two domains of human thought.
