Written and collected by Zia H Shah MD, Chief Editor of the Muslim Times
Majority of the European countries are now atheists. If we do surveys of the leading scientists, mathematicians and philosophers we find that more than three-fourths of them are atheists. In other words they not only deny God but also human soul and Afterlife.
The study of human consciousness, free will or soul are precisely the pursuit that can shake them out of their slumber.
Surah Waqiah of the holy Quran makes a profound case for Monotheism, human soul and the Afterlife to jolt humanity in better ways of thinking:
It was We who created you: will you not believe? Consider [the semen] you eject–do you create it yourselves or are We the Creator? We ordained death to be among you. Nothing could stop Us if We intended to change you and recreate you in a way unknown to you. You have learned how you were first created: will you not reflect? Consider the seeds you sow in the ground–is it you who make them grow or We? If We wished, We could turn your harvest into chaff and leave you to wail, ‘We are burdened with debt; we are bereft.’ Consider the water you drink– was it you who brought it down from the rain-cloud or We? If We wanted, We could make it bitter: will you not be thankful? Consider the fire you kindle–is it you who make the wood for it grow or We? We made it a reminder, and useful to those who kindle it, so [Prophet] glorify the name of your Lord, the Supreme.
I swear by the positions of the stars–a mighty oath, if you only knew–that this is truly a noble Quran, in a protected Record that only the purified can touch, sent down from the Lord of all being. How can you scorn this statement? And how, in return for the livelihood you are given, can you deny it? When the soul of a dying man comes up to his throat while you gaze on–We are nearer to him than you, though you do not see Us–why, if you are not to be judged, do you not restore his soul to him, if what you say is true?
If that dying person is one of those who will be brought near to God, he will have rest, ease, and a Garden of Bliss. (Al Quran 56:57-89)
Scientists can only study in a methodological naturalist or materialist paradigm because of human observations and knowledge limitations. We can only study material things with the help of scientific methods.
Firstly, let us talk about scientists and one philosopher who are studying human consciousness in materialistic paradigm:
David Chalmers: The Hard Problem of Consciousness
Australian philosopher David Chalmers is renowned for articulating the “hard problem of consciousness,” which questions how and why physical processes in the brain give rise to subjective experiences. He distinguishes this from “easy” problems, such as understanding behavioral or cognitive functions, arguing that subjective experience remains inadequately explained by physicalist accounts. Chalmers also explores the concept of philosophical zombies—hypothetical beings identical to humans but lacking conscious experience—to challenge materialist views of the mind.
Daniel Dennett: Consciousness and Materialism
American philosopher Daniel Dennett advocates for a materialist understanding of consciousness, proposing that mental states, including consciousness, result entirely from physical processes in the brain. In his book Consciousness Explained (1991), Dennett introduces the “multiple drafts” model, suggesting that perceptions and thoughts are subject to continuous editing by various brain processes, challenging traditional notions of a unified stream of consciousness.
Christof Koch: Neuroscientific Approaches
Neuroscientist Christof Koch has significantly advanced the empirical study of consciousness. Collaborating with Francis Crick, Koch investigated the neural correlates of consciousness, seeking to identify specific brain processes associated with conscious experience. His recent work explores the potential for artificial intelligence to possess consciousness, emphasizing the need for interdisciplinary research to address this complex issue.
Philip Goff: Panpsychism and Consciousness
British philosopher Philip Goff advocates for panpsychism, the view that consciousness is a fundamental and ubiquitous aspect of the physical world. He argues that materialist and dualist approaches fail to adequately explain consciousness, proposing instead that even the simplest forms of matter possess elements of experience. Goff’s work seeks to integrate consciousness into the scientific worldview by rethinking its relationship with the physical universe.
William Hirstein: Neurophilosophy and Confabulation
American philosopher William Hirstein focuses on the intersection of philosophy and neuroscience, particularly concerning confabulation—false memories or perceptions. His research examines how errors in memory or perception, combined with failures in executive brain processes, lead to confabulation, offering insights into the neural basis of consciousness and self-deception.
But, it is only for the thoughtful and insightful philosophers to side with the theologians of Abrahamic faiths who believe in human soul rather than with atheist scientists who deny it. These philosophers in this century are coming from the Christian rather than the Muslim tradition and there is no reason not to collaborate on common grounds. I will describe two thoughtful philosophers today.
J.P. Moreland
J.P. Moreland, a distinguished philosopher and theologian, is renowned for his robust defense of the human soul’s existence and its integral role in defining human nature. His extensive work in philosophy of mind and theological anthropology offers a comprehensive perspective on the soul’s nature and significance.
Moreland advocates for Thomistic substance dualism, a view rooted in the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. This perspective posits that human beings are composed of both a physical body and an immaterial soul, with the soul serving as the form that animates and unifies the body. Moreland explains, “The soul is a substantial, unified reality that informs (gives form to) its body.”
In his book The Soul: How We Know It’s Real and Why It Matters, Moreland argues against materialistic views that reduce human consciousness and identity to mere physical processes. He asserts that the soul is an immaterial substance, distinct from the body, which underlies personal identity and consciousness. Moreland emphasizes that “Scripture, sound philosophical reasoning, and everyday experience all point to the reality of an immaterial soul.”
Moreland acknowledges the complex relationship between the soul and the body, suggesting that while they are distinct, they interact closely. He notes, “The soul and body relate to each other in a cause-effect way,” indicating that the immaterial soul can influence physical states and vice versa.
In collaboration with Scott B. Rae, Moreland co-authored Body & Soul: Human Nature and the Crisis in Ethics, where they explore how one’s understanding of human nature impacts ethical considerations. They argue that recognizing humans as ensouled beings has profound implications for issues such as abortion, euthanasia, and human dignity. The authors contend that “some sort of substance dualist view of human persons has been, historically, the reigning view among Christians.”
Moreland critiques physicalism—the belief that only physical entities exist—by highlighting phenomena that material explanations cannot adequately address, such as consciousness, intentionality, and free will. He posits that the existence of these non-physical aspects of human experience points toward the reality of the soul. Moreland asserts, “The brain is a very interesting electrolyzed piece of meat that correlates with consciousness while we’re in the body.”
J.P. Moreland’s philosophical contributions provide a compelling case for the existence of the human soul, emphasizing its immaterial nature and essential role in defining human identity and ethical values. His defense of Thomistic substance dualism offers a nuanced understanding of the interplay between the soul and body, challenging materialistic paradigms and underscoring the significance of the soul in contemporary philosophical and theological discourse.
David Bentley Hart
David Bentley Hart, an Eastern Orthodox theologian and philosopher, offers a nuanced perspective on the human soul, intertwining classical metaphysics with contemporary thought. His exploration delves into the soul’s nature, its relationship with the body, and its role in human identity.
Hart emphasizes the importance of understanding ancient conceptions of the soul to fully grasp its significance in Christian theology. He notes that for the ancients, the soul (ψυχή) was not merely an immaterial essence but a substantial reality that animated the body. In his essay, “The Spiritual Was More Substantial Than the Material for the Ancients,” Hart explains:
“In the broader system of ideas in which [Paul’s] picture of things subsisted, ‘soul’—ψυχή or anima—was chiefly the life-principle proper to the realm of generation and decay, the ‘psychical’ or ‘animal’ substance that endows sublunary organisms with the power of self-movement and growth, though only for a short time.”
This perspective underscores the soul’s integral role in imparting life and movement to the physical body.
Hart engages with the concept of resurrection, particularly the nature of the resurrected body as discussed by the Apostle Paul. He interprets Paul’s distinction between the “psychical” (soul-powered) body and the “pneumatical” (spirit-powered) body, suggesting a transformation from a mortal, soul-animated body to an immortal, spirit-animated one. Hart articulates this view:
“Hence, according to Paul, the body of the resurrection is not one of flesh and blood animated by ‘soul,’ but is rather a new reality altogether, an entirely spiritual body beyond composition or dissolution.”
This interpretation highlights a transition from a perishable, soul-animated existence to an imperishable, spirit-animated life in the resurrection.
Hart critiques contemporary materialistic perspectives that reduce human consciousness and identity to mere physical processes. He argues that such views fail to account for the depth of human experience and the transcendent aspects of consciousness. In his book The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss, Hart asserts:
“Consciousness cannot be satisfactorily explained in purely physical terms.”
By emphasizing the limitations of materialism, Hart advocates for a more profound understanding of the soul’s role in human existence.
Hart connects the concept of the soul with notions of human dignity and moral worth. He suggests that recognizing the soul’s immortality elevates the significance of human life and underpins ethical frameworks. In his article “Human Dignity Was a Rarity Before Christianity,” Hart observes:
“Perched as they were at the vertiginous summit of the social hierarchy of their time, the church’s pagan critics could only look down on the Christian movement, and could see it not as the liberation of deep but hitherto unexpressed human longings, but only as something monstrous and degenerate, threatening the very order of the world.”
This reflection indicates that the Christian conception of the soul contributed to a revolutionary understanding of human dignity, challenging existing social hierarchies.
David Bentley Hart’s exploration of the human soul bridges ancient philosophical insights with contemporary theological discourse. By examining the soul’s substantial nature, its role in resurrection, and its implications for human dignity, Hart provides a comprehensive defense of the soul’s enduring significance in understanding human identity and purpose.
Conclusion
I believe that if the Muslim and the Christian theologians and philosophers team up, rather than struggling with each other, they can lay a very powerful case against atheism in the area of human consciousness, free will and human soul. This also lays out a strong case for Afterlife and the Muslims and the Christians can chose to differ on the details of Afterlife.
The Glorious Quran and Science 
Leave a reply to Table of Contents – The Quranic Compassion Cancel reply