Consequently, it is puzzling to me why one should seek to construct the new non-scientific and spiritual metaphysics which Iammarino describes in his review without seeing it necessary to account in some way for this problematic global diversity (if Clayton does so at some point in the book, I readily stand corrected, but I do not get a sense of this from the review). The Trinity concept on which Iammarino comments is a good case in point. As far as I can see, it is not a universal religious concept which is immediately comprehensible to, or easily digestible by, followers of religions as diverse as, for example, Islam, Buddhism, Amazonian shamanism, African animism, West Indian voodooism, Jainism or Taoism. It is not even a concept acceptable to all Christian sects. There are, similarly, religious traditions which do not include a concept of a universe-creating deity.

Take, conversely, the case of a scientist who comes across a previously unidentified genetic-behavioral correlation in a species of marine animal off the coast of Canada. She is going to be intrinsically curious to know whether the same correlation can be found in phenotypes of the species in the Tasman Sea or the Bering Strait. Her concern is precisely the knowledge that a good scientific hypothesis must account for all the available data, not simply data which is conveniently to hand. This is the problem I have with Clayton’s thesis as reviewed in summary by Iammarino. While it is evidently not by any means standard Christian theology, it is all the same Christocentric, and I can only assume that the reason for this is that Christian theology and the Bible are, precisely, conveniently to hand for the author. If writers on religion and spirituality are going to attempt to build bridges between religion and science, it seems to me that they really have to come to terms with the reality that religious conceptualization is a far broader manifold than the Christian tradition, and that the broader manifold is the scope of the data that needs to be accounted for.

The same way you answer “the fact that thousands and thousands of parents have watched their children regress after” breast feeding.

The two events occur incidentally.

You have now lost a long time reader.