My ambitions never included getting published in Scientific American and after Physics I in my second year of higher education, any physical science journal. Certainly I would never submit commentary on any typical article as my final profession was a graphic comedian. But along the way I fooled around with Sociology and Philosophy, and that renowned journal is publishing radical Philosophy (Theology) as opinion.
The first idea opined is that physicists "prefer" not thinking about consciousness as a basis for Nature. Prefers happen in fashion and wine orders; Physicists, sociologists and artists avoid intelligent causes of reality so their work has value. All religion makes human endeavor trivial; Marx was too limited, focusing only on work/labor. This is besides the fact that empiricism tells us that the Universe is "pointless".
On to our "fallen world" (The author really used this phrase!); Modern astronomy shows its the best one for life we've found so far. Leaving aside possible future definition of life, this brings up an old children's question: Where is God? The theme of the opinion writer is basically the answer to the children's question Why is there something instead of nothing? requires intelligence as a cause. So if God is clearly not here with us fallen, where?: As the old commercial goes: "Where's the beef??"; Show us something the "thing" has affected, beside one small, insignificant different world orbiting a main-sequence star in the suburbs of a typical spiral galaxy.
It is puzzling that an educational institution seems to be funding this advocacy; There are plenty of churches, temples and mosques throughout the world as well as Hoboken, NJ. The author should do less "science writing" and more science work.