Science as Salvation: A Modern Myth and its Meaning

This monograph examines the quasi-religious dimensions of scientific materialism and its promise of human perfectibility through technological progress. Midgley argues that modern scientific culture has generated its own mythology, one that paradoxically denies the validity of myth while simultaneously operating through mythic structures. She identifies salvation narratives within popular science writing and certain strands of scientific thought, particularly those promising ultimate knowledge, cosmic significance, or transcendence through technology.

The work critiques prominent scientific thinkers including Richard Dawkins, Jacques Monod, and Stephen Hawking, demonstrating how their ostensibly rational discourse employs religious imagery and eschatological themes. Midgley traces how reductionist materialism functions as a comprehensive worldview that extends far beyond empirical claims, offering meaning, purpose, and hope in ways traditionally associated with religion. She examines specific salvation myths within science: the conquest of death through medicine, the achievement of omniscience through a final theory, and the transformation of humanity through genetic engineering or artificial intelligence.

Central to Midgley's analysis is the distinction between science as empirical method and scientism as ideological system. She argues that the latter inappropriately extends scientific authority into moral and metaphysical domains, creating what she terms "omnicompetent" science that claims to answer all meaningful questions. This expansionist tendency emerges from deeper cultural needs for certainty and purpose that persist despite secularization. The monograph situates these tendencies within the broader context of Enlightenment thought and its aftermath, showing how scientific materialism inherited and transformed religious impulses rather than eliminating them.

The philosophical significance lies in exposing conceptual confusion at the intersection of science and religion. Midgley demonstrates that the science-religion conflict often involves category errors on both sides, with scientists making unacknowledged metaphysical claims while religious critics misunderstand scientific method. Her work challenges both naive scientism and anti-scientific fundamentalism, advocating for intellectual humility and recognition of legitimate domains of inquiry. The analysis contributes to philosophy of science by revealing how cultural and psychological factors shape supposedly neutral scientific discourse, while offering insights into why certain scientific narratives achieve cultural dominance. Midgley's approach combines philosophical analysis with intellectual history, examining how ideas function socially rather than merely assessing their truth claims.