It is refreshing to hear a discussion of sincere agnostics discuss the prospects of spirituality and God in light of a scientific orientation. If you have the time definitely watch it:
I think for Baha'i's who start with a spiritual orientation, it is easy to accept science as a welcome complement. We have certain assumptions that make them easily compatible.
I am one of those people. I have always had an intuitive feeling about spirituality; it has always seemed second nature. So then, the language I used is couched in the assumption of spiritual reality, even in a scientific discussion.
I realize more now that many people do not contain any such intuition naturally. Nothing is assumed, and for them discussing spirituality with a believer of any religion can be very frustrating, because the language is different. The word "spirituality" is frustrating because it contains a metaphysical assumption, even before the discussion starts. To them "spirituality" is just a fancy word for moral inspiration predicated upon a belief in eternal purpose and accountability, the predisposition of which can be explained by biological and cultural evolution. How much more frustrating for somebody like a Baha'i to claim harmony of science and religion so easily, while using sloppy and imprecise language to justify it.
Part of the Baha'i belief in "progressive revelation" is that we must always reinterpret and refine our beliefs based upon evolving evolutionary capacity and scientific development. It is a pursuit that I hope to keep exploring and writing about in more detail. That is, wiping away the baggage of popular interpretation of the Baha'i writings, and understanding them again in a more detached and analytical manner. Of course this aproach has its limits; subjectivity and experience is indespensible to making any logical value judgement. And really in the end it is a matter of faith either for or against belief. In any case, I believe that faith in its true form, is the opposite of delusion.