 In module three of our philosophy and science course, the topic explored will be faith, physics, and the relationship between the two, a theme that will be explored in lectures by professors Tom McLeish and Michael Murray. The question of whether there is room for faith or more generally religious belief within a wider scientific worldview is one that has importance far beyond just abstract philosophical debate. This question crops up in heated political discussions and it has important ramifications for policy, law, and education. This with most difficult philosophical questions. The question of the compatibility of faith and physics requires some careful disambiguation. In one very trivial sense, of course faith and physics can complement one another. After all, the physical laws of the universe clearly permit faith just as they permit dogmatism, atheism, and other kinds of belief. And likewise, one could come to accept physical laws on the basis of faith, just as one could come to endorse a particular religious claim or set of religious claims on the basis of faith. But these kinds of trivial compatibilities don't get at the heart of things. Just as we saw in the dispute about relativism and absolutism in science, the mere fact of a diversity of scientific perspectives is something we can all agree about. So likewise, the fact that faith and physics and more generally religion and science are compatible in the trivial ways just noted is more or less uncontroversial. Let's think more carefully now about what is that issue here and we take the compatibility between the two to be a deep and difficult philosophical question. That's what we have in mind is something like this. Physics, like any branch of science, is bound by certain methods and faith, in some relevant sense, falls outside of such methods. Therefore, given that both faith and physics constitute widespread modes of organizing the perspective we take on ourselves in the world, the alleged fact that their methods have little in common gives rise to a puzzle. Something like this is closer to the right track. However, there's still room to be clearer. Consider that even if we grant that faith understood as a method falls outside the kind of scientific method characteristic of physics. It's not clear, at least yet anyway, where the interesting conflict lies. After all, dreaming, hoping, imagining, and many other aspects of our cognitive and emotional lives fall outside the methods of science, and yet we don't take this fact to establish any deep or interesting question about the compatibility of physics with these kinds of attitudes. So why physics and faith, or more generally religious belief? Presumably, the heart of the matter must be specified in terms of how the methods or claims characteristic of one mode would seem to not just be independent of, but to positively exclude the methods or claims characteristic of the other mode. And once we begin to question the nature and extent of such exclusion, we find a range of more interesting and much more specific philosophical questions. Our lectures by Professor McLeish and Professor Murray will approach some of these more specific issues. McLeish and Murray both approach the issue of the compatibility of faith and more generally religious belief and physics by looking at a range of concrete cases which can help us to better understand what's at stake here and how to critically think about the issues raised in light of recent work in philosophy, science, and religion.