Eric Steinhart – författare

Dawkin''s militant atheism is well known; his profound faith less well known

In this book, atheist philosopher Eric Steinhart explores the spiritual dimensions of Richard Dawkins’ books, which are shown to encompass:

·       the meaning and purpose of life

·       an appreciation of Platonic beauty and truth

·       a deep belief in the rationality of the universe

·       an aversion to both scientism and nihilism

As an atheist, Dawkins strives to develop a scientific alternative to theism, and while he declares that science is not a religion, he also proclaims it to be a spiritual enterprise. His books are filled with fragmentary sketches of this ‘spiritual atheism’, resembling a great unfinished cathedral. This book systematises and completes Dawkins’ arguments and reveals their deep roots in Stoicism and Platonism.

Expanding on Dawkins’ ideas, Steinhart shows how atheists can develop powerful ethical principles, compelling systems of symbols and images, and meaningful personal and social practices. Believing in Dawkins is a rigorous and potent entreaty for the use of science and reason to support spiritually rich and optimistic ways of thinking and living.

Singularity Hypotheses: A Scientific and Philosophical Assessment offers authoritative, jargon-free essays and critical commentaries on accelerating technological progress and the notion of technological singularity. It focuses on conjectures about the intelligence explosion, transhumanism, and whole brain emulation. Recent years have seen a plethora of forecasts about the profound, disruptive impact that is likely to result from further progress in these areas. Many commentators however doubt the scientific rigor of these forecasts, rejecting them as speculative and unfounded. We therefore invited prominent computer scientists, physicists, philosophers, biologists, economists and other thinkers to assess the singularity hypotheses. Their contributions go beyond speculation, providing deep insights into the main issues and a balanced picture of the debate.