Skip to main content

Secular Transhumanism as Scientism?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 2700 Accesses

Abstract

What I want to consider in this chapter is whether or not questions that arise from the transhumanist debate are to be kept firmly within a secular, empirical, scientific arena and, if this were the case, is science sufficient in answering those kinds of questions that do arise? If it is not sufficient, then where else might we look for guidance? How far can the boundaries be stretched before they begin to tear? Whilst many transhumanists, our secular transhumanists, are quite prepared to be ‘interdisciplinary’ in their methodology, hence allowing such disciplines as philosophy and, indeed, the ‘arts’, within these boundaries, there is still, alas, some robust resistance to religion which, I believe, is understandable, but also misplaced. The methodology adopted for this book is phenomenological in the sense that an understanding of what it means to be human (and, by implication, transhuman) requires an understanding of human experience that, in itself, cannot be limited to the acquisition of empirical data. Religion, and in this case Islam, offers important insights into this understanding of the human.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Academically speaking, Sheldrake is extremely well-qualified in biological science and his ideas have appeared in a number of prominent scientific publications, but his interest in Indian philosophy especially, which has impacted upon his scientific views, has drawn considerable criticism from the scientific community.

  2. 2.

    Note: All quotes from the Qur’an are from the translation by M.A.S. Abdel Haleem, Oxford University Press, 2005.

Bibliography

Note: All quotes from the Qur’an are from the translation by M.A.S. Abdel Haleem, Oxford University Press, 2005.

Books

  • Almond, Ian. 2010. A History of Islam in German Thought: From Leibniz to Nietzsche. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, Simon. 1996. The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvino, Italo. 1988. Six Memos for the Next Millennium. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, Richard. 2007. The God Delusion. London: Black Swan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dummett, Michael. 2010. The Nature and Future of Philosophy. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eldredge, Niles. 1982. The Monkey Business: A Scientist Looks at Creationism. New York: Washington Square Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goetz, Stewart, and Charles Taliaferro. 2008. Naturalism. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, Stephen Jay. 2002. Rocks of Ages. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harari, Yuval Noah. 2011. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, Sam. 2010. The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values. London: Transworld.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, Martin. 1982. The Basic Problems of Phenomenology. Translated by Albert Hofstadter. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, Bettany. 2010. The Hemlock Cup: Socrates, Athens and the Search for the Good Life. London: Jonathan Cape.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hume, David. 1978. A Treatise of Human Nature. 2nd ed. Edited by P.H. Nidditch. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant, Immanuel. 1900. Dreams of a Spirit-Seer. Translated by Emanuel F. Goerwitz. London: Swan Sonnenschein and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mabey, Richard. 2015. Cabaret of Plants: Botany and Imagination. London: Profile Books Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, Thomas. 1986. The View from Nowhere. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012. Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pigliucci, Massimo. 2010. Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science from Bunk. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Plantinga, Alvin. 2011. Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Plato. 2012. Republic. Translated by Christopher Rowe. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quine, W.V. 1981. Theories and Things. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, Matheson. 2006. Husserl: A Guide for the Perplexed. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheldrake, Rupert. 2012. The Science Delusion: Feeling the Spirit of Enquiry. London: Hodder & Stoughton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner, George. 1989. Martin Heidegger. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swedenborg, Emanuel. 2009. Arcana Coelestia. Vols. 1–12. Translated by John Clowes. West Chester, PA: Swedenborg Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swinburne, Richard. 2004. The Existence of God. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Taliaferro, Charles. 1994. Consciousness and the Mind of God. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, Keith. 2008. Why There Almost Certain Is a God. Oxford: Lion Book.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Bernard. 2006. Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Journal Articles and Book Chapters

  • Boudry, Maarten, Stefaan Blancke, and Johan Braeckman. 2010. How Not to Attack Intelligent Design Creationism: Philosophical Misconceptions About Methodological Naturalism. Foundations of Science 15 (3): 227–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012. Grist to the Mill of Anti-Evolutionism: The Failed Strategy of Ruling the Supernatural Out of Science by Philosophical Fiat. Science and Education 21: 1151–1165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cellucci, Carlo. 2015. Is Philosophy a Humanistic Discipline? Philosophia 43: 259–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, David. 1995. Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies 2 (3): 200–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dembski, William. 2002. Kurzweil’s Impoverished Spirituality. In Are We Spiritual Machines? Ray Kurzweil vs. The Critics of Strong AI, ed. J.W. Richards, 98–114. Seattle: The Discovery Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishman, Yonatan I., and Maarten Boudry. 2013. Does Science Presuppose Naturalism (or Anything at All)? Science and Education 22 (5): 921–949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forrest, Barbara. 2000. Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection. Philo 3: 7–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Law, Stephen. 2017. Scientism! In Science Unlimited? The Challenge of Scientism, ed. Maarten Boudry and Massimo Pigliucci, 121–144. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, Thomas. 1974. What Is It Like to Be a Bat? The Philosophical Review 83 (4): 435–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plantinga, Alvin. 1996. Science: Augustinian or Duhemian? Faith and Philosophy 13: 369–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1997. Methodological Naturalism. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 49: 143–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, Rustum. 2005. Scientism and Technology as Religions. Zygon 40 (4): 835–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stilwell, Phil. 2009. The Status of Methodological Naturalism as Justified by Precedent. Studies in Liberal Arts and Sciences 41: 229–247.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roy Jackson .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Jackson, R. (2020). Secular Transhumanism as Scientism?. In: Muslim and Supermuslim. Palgrave Studies in the Future of Humanity and its Successors. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37093-0_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics