An interesting bit of talk has broken out about science, religion, and the nature of faith.
The most recent addition to the conversation was a new NYTimes piece on the Laws of Nature.

Laws of Nature, Source Unknown
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/18/science/18law.html?ref=science

I agreed quite a lot with Davies’ original op-ed and was shocked to read the Reality Club’s discussion on the Edge.org site. I thought they misunderstood Davies’ paper and spoke mostly to points he did not make.
The misunderstanding, I believe, comes from these writers’ confusion between religion and the source or insight that seeds most religions. In fact, the media’s naive debate between religion and science is often in the context of this misunderstanding - that religion is the truth. A distinction helpful to me is this: religion is the rule-making structure that rises up around an individual’s insight. That’s it. The religion is not the truth any more than the map is not the territory. It’s this fundamental point that religion’s deny or don’t understand, and many critical of religion don’t tackle. If anything, the emotion and indignation one can read in the Reality Club’s responses points to some unacknowledged truth. Like most any psychologist will tell you, your shadow will sneak up and show itself underneath your own nose when it is unacknowledged.

On www.Edge.org:
a) GOD VS. SCIENCE
A Debate Between Natalie Angier and David Sloan Wilson
b) Taking Science on Faith, Paul Davies
c) The Reality Club tackles ‘Taking Science on Faith’

http://edge.org/documents/archive/edge229.html

The original NYTimes Op-Ed:
Taking Science on Faith
By PAUL DAVIES
Published: November 24, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/24/opinion/24davies.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Paul Davies responds to edge.org:
http://www.edge.org/discourse/science_faith.html#davies

Paul Davies’ Website
http://cosmos.asu.edu/