پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی ومطالعات فرهنگی پژوهش‌های علم و دین 23830646 16 2 2026 01 21 Transhumanism and the Crisis of Political Legitimacy: Rethinking the Responsible Human from the Perspective of Political Jurisprudence ترابشریت و بحران مشروعیت سیاسی: بازاندیشی در انسانِ مکلف از منظر فقه سیاسی 1 30 10857 10.30465/srs.2026.53009.2247 FA متین انجم روز استادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران. (نویسنده مسئول) 0000-0003-3083-1916 محمد خضری دانشجوی دوره دکتری علوم سیاسی – سیاستگذاری عمومی، گروه علوم سیاسی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران 0009-0005-2342-3975 Journal Article 2025 10 03 Abstract The transhumanist movement, using biotechnologies and artificial intelligence, seeks to surpass human biological, cognitive, and psychological limits, thereby challenging the concept of the "responsible human" (insān-e mukallaf). This concept forms the core of the relationship between the individual, sharī‘a, and political authority in Islamic political jurisprudence. The study explores how transhumanism, by redefining humans as self-designed and engineerable beings, undermines the political legitimacy of religious-jurisprudential systems. In such systems, the responsible human is rational, free, and accountable to God, with political legitimacy depending on obedience to sharī‘a. Transhumanism disrupts this by producing technological subjects who may reject religious obligations, creating a crisis in jurisprudential legitimacy. This crisis arises from an epistemological gap between religious and transhumanist views of humanity, redefining dignity, free will, and duty. Drawing on Foucault’s biopolitical framework and jurisprudential analysis, the study shows that enhancement technologies turn body and mind into technological objects, eroding religious authority. Three scenarios are proposed—confrontation, adaptation, and transition—with adaptation, through dynamic ijtihād and redefinition of jurisprudential concepts, considered the most effective for preserving legitimacy. Recommendations include interdisciplinary education, advisory councils, equitable policies, and public awareness efforts to help jurisprudential systems address technological change while maintaining religious principles. Keywords: Transhumanism, Political Legitimacy, Responsible Human, Political Jurisprudence, Justice, Technology. Introduction Profound transformations in biotechnology, artificial intelligence, and genetic engineering have positioned humanity beyond classical philosophical, religious, or political definitions. The transhumanist movement seeks to transcend biological, cognitive, and psychological limits through advanced technologies, aiming to create an “upgraded” humanity. This vision fundamentally conflicts with concepts of the “natural human,” “soul,” “body,” “death,” and especially “religious duty and moral responsibility.” In societies where political legitimacy rests on political jurisprudence, it poses both an epistemological challenge and a strategic contest over power foundations. Transhumanism remains in its discursive formation stage — a theoretical, future-oriented possibility rather than an immediate crisis for religious legitimacy. This research therefore examines the potential crisis as a latent risk that could emerge from unaddressed shifts in the human concept and its relation to sharī‘a. In political jurisprudence, the “responsible human” (insān-e mukallaf) forms the core of individual–political power relations. Religiously, humans are autonomous, aware, and accountable before God and institutions; legitimacy of religious government depends on this anthropology, duties toward sharī‘a, and capacity for divine obligations. Yet if transhumanist technologies reshape identity — via hybrid bodies, augmentable memories, or eliminated death — does such a being remain subject to religious duties? Can religious institutions govern these subjects? If unclear or negative, what fate awaits jurisprudence-based legitimacy? The article posits transhumanism as a discursive threat to religious power structures, originating in anthropology but profoundly impacting political legitimacy. The central question is: How does transhumanism, by altering the responsible human, challenge legitimacy in religious-jurisprudential systems? The hypothesis holds that it transforms responsible human identity, triggering a crisis in jurisprudential legitimacy logic due to an epistemological gap in the human–divine power relation, unbridgeable without radical rethinking. Materials & Methods This research employs an analytical-critical method with an interdisciplinary approach to explore the relationship between transhumanism, the responsible human (insān-e mukallaf), and political legitimacy. Drawing on jurisprudential sources, philosophy of religion, political theory, and philosophy of technology, it enables a multidimensional analysis. Conceptual analysis clarifies key notions such as the “responsible human,” “transhumanism,” “biopolitics,” and “political legitimacy,” revealing ruptures by contrasting the human in political jurisprudence (a rational, autonomous, accountable being) with the transhumanist view (an engineerable, self-designed entity). Inspired by Michel Foucault, the genealogical method traces historical and discursive shifts in concepts of the human and power. It investigates how the technological subject emerges in transhumanist discourse and affects political legitimacy, uncovering concealed power-knowledge dynamics in the encounter between political jurisprudence and emerging technologies. Data are derived from documentary and library sources, including Islamic jurisprudential and theological texts, works in philosophy of technology, political and sociological studies, and bioethical literature. These are analyzed comparatively to highlight differences and connections between religious and transhumanist anthropologies and their consequences for political legitimacy. The analysis follows four stages: (1) extracting the “responsible human” concept from Islamic jurisprudential and political texts, defining humans as rational, autonomous, and accountable before sharī‘a; (2) comparing this with the transhumanist definition to identify conceptual breaks; (3) assessing the rupture’s impact on jurisprudential systems’ legitimacy using Foucault’s biopolitical lens and jurisprudential frameworks; and (4) proposing three response scenarios — confrontation, adaptation, and transition — for political jurisprudence facing transhumanist challenges. Discussion & Result The research demonstrates that transhumanism, by redefining humans as self-designed beings, challenges the concept of the responsible human and destabilizes the foundations of legitimacy in jurisprudential systems. This rupture disrupts the traditional relationship between humans, sharī‘a, and power, raising questions about applying religious rulings to enhanced individuals. From a Foucauldian perspective, transhumanism manifests biopower, transforming body and mind into technological objects and generating new power structures. Without conceptual rethinking, religious systems risk declining authority; however, dynamic ijtihād offers a viable response. The adaptation scenario — preserving core religious principles while flexibly engaging with technology — is deemed most suitable, although it requires interdisciplinary education and advisory councils. Ignoring these transformations risks an identity crisis, whereas proactive engagement sustains jurisprudential cohesion. Additionally, a fourth scenario of mutual dissolution or “techno-theological integration” is considered, in which religion reinterprets itself through technology, potentially giving rise to techno-religious legitimacy. This aligns with Foucauldian genealogy, where competing discourses reproduce power through mutual integration rather than pure opposition. Conclusion Transhumanism constitutes not only a scientific-philosophical challenge but also a profound political-social threat to jurisprudential systems. Without rethinking foundational jurisprudential concepts (dignity, obligation, embodiment), political legitimacy faces serious risk. The adaptation approach, grounded in dynamic ijtihād, interdisciplinary dialogue, equitable policy-making, and public awareness initiatives, represents the most effective strategy for preserving religious coherence in the era of accelerating technological transformation. It is recommended that jurisprudential institutions incorporate biotechnology and digital ethics into formal training, establish permanent techno-ethical advisory bodies, and promote broad societal discourse to enable jurisprudential systems to respond constructively to technological change while faithfully upholding religious principles. جنبش ترابشریت با بهره‌گیری از فناوری‌های زیستی و هوش مصنوعی، با هدف ارتقای انسان از محدودیت‌های زیستی، شناختی و روانی، هویت انسانِ مکلف را که در فقه سیاسی هسته مرکزی رابطه فرد با شریعت و قدرت سیاسی است، به چالش می‌کشد. این پژوهش به این مهم می پردازد که چگونه ترابشریت، با بازتعریف انسان به‌عنوان موجودی خودطراحی‌شده و قابل‌مهندسی، مشروعیت سیاسی نظام‌های فقهی-دینی را متزلزل می‌سازد. در فقه سیاسی، انسان مکلف موجودی عاقل، مختار و مسئول در برابر خداوند است که مشروعیت نظام سیاسی به اطاعت او از شریعت وابسته است. ترابشریت با ایجاد سوژه‌های فناورانه‌ای که ممکن است خود را تابع احکام شرعی ندانند، این رابطه را مختل کرده و بحرانی در منطق مشروعیت فقهی ایجاد می‌کند. این بحران، ریشه در شکاف معرفتی میان انسان‌شناسی دینی و ترابشری دارد که مفاهیم کرامت، اختیار و تکلیف را بازتعریف می‌کند. این پژوهش با بهره‌گیری از چارچوب زیست‌سیاست فوکو و تحلیل‌های فقهی، نشان می‌دهد که فناوری‌های ارتقایی، با تبدیل بدن و ذهن به ابژه‌های فناورانه، اقتدار دینی را تضعیف می‌کنند. سه سناریوی تقابل، تطبیق و گذار برای مواجهه با این چالش پیشنهاد شده که سناریوی تطبیق، با تأکید بر اجتهاد پویا و بازتعریف مفاهیم فقهی، مناسب‌ترین راهکار برای حفظ مشروعیت است. پیشنهادات شامل آموزش میان‌رشته‌ای، ایجاد شوراهای مشورتی، سیاست‌گذاری عادلانه و آگاهی‌بخشی عمومی است تا نظام‌های فقهی بتوانند با حفظ اصول دینی، به تحولات فناورانه پاسخ دهند.

https://elmodin.ihcs.ac.ir/article_10857_aba49b6369ec3a9497c9c54696f6a3fd.pdf

پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی ومطالعات فرهنگی پژوهش‌های علم و دین 23830646 16 2 2026 01 21 Reconsidering the Mind–Body Problem in Light of Neuroscience: From Mental Substance to Network-Based Realization بازاندیشی مسئله ذهن و بدن در پرتو علوم اعصاب: از جوهر ذهن تا تحقق شبکه‌ای 31 61 10836 10.30465/srs.2026.52908.2243 FA فرهاد نوائی دکتری جامعه شناسی سیاسی و کارشناس ارشد روانشناسی عمومی Journal Article 2025 09 24 This article reconsiders the mind–body problem from Cartesian dualism to contemporary neuroscience. The central question is whether neuroscientific physicalism provides a decisive answer to Cartesian dualism or merely reformulates the problem at a different explanatory level. The study adopts a problem-oriented conceptual analysis combined with a focused review of neuroscientific evidence, including lesion studies, neural correlates of consciousness, and causal interventions such as brain stimulation. In addition, three influential models of consciousness—Global Workspace Theory, Integrated Information Theory, and Predictive Processing—are examined as representative frameworks linking neural organization to conscious experience. The analysis suggests that the systematic dependence of mental functions on large-scale brain networks and the manipulability of cognitive content and decision-making undermine the notion of the mind as an ontologically independent substance. At the same time, the article argues that moving from neural correlation and causal intervention to strong ontological identity claims requires methodological and conceptual caution. The persistence of first-person experience and qualitative aspects of consciousness indicates that the transition from dualism to physicalism does not resolve the problem once and for all, but rather shifts its formulation. The article concludes that neuroscientific physicalism should be understood not as a final solution to the mind–body problem, but as a powerful and empirically grounded framework for its ongoing reformulation and investigation. این مقاله به بازاندیشی مسئلۀ ذهن و بدن از دوگانه‌انگاری دکارتی تا رویکردهای معاصر علوم اعصاب می‌پردازد. پرسش محوری آن است که آیا فیزیکالیسم علوم اعصاب پاسخی قاطع به دوگانه‌انگاری دکارتی ارائه کرده است یا صرفاً صورت‌بندی این مسئله را به سطحی تازه منتقل کرده است. روش پژوهش مبتنی بر تحلیل مفهومی مسئله‌محور همراه با مرور هدفمند شواهد علوم اعصاب شناختی، شامل مطالعات ضایعه، همبستگی‌های عصبی آگاهی و مداخلات علّی، و بررسی چند مدل شاخص آگاهی مانند فضای کاری جهانی، اطلاعات یکپارچه و پردازش پیش‌بینانه است. تحلیل‌ها نشان می‌دهد که وابستگی منظم کارکردهای ذهنی به سازمان‌یافتگی شبکه‌های مغزی و امکان دست‌کاری علّی محتوا و تصمیم، ادعای استقلال جوهری ذهن را به‌طور جدی به چالش می‌کشد و فهم «تحقق شبکه‌ای چندسطحی» را برجسته می‌سازد. با این حال، مقاله استدلال می‌کند که گذار از همبستگی و مداخله تجربی به ادعای اینهمانی هستی‌شناختی، بدون احتیاط مفهومی و روش‌شناختی موجه نیست و شکاف میان تبیین‌های کارکردی و کیفیات پدیداری تجربه به‌طور کامل برطرف نمی‌شود. بر این اساس، فیزیکالیسم علوم اعصاب نه به‌منزلۀ حل نهایی مسئله ذهن و بدن، بلکه به‌عنوان چارچوبی کاری و آزمون‌پذیر برای بازصورت‌بندی و پیشبرد این مسئله ارزیابی می‌شود.

https://elmodin.ihcs.ac.ir/article_10836_97e49161287e7a4f9b745366e4f9431b.pdf

پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی ومطالعات فرهنگی پژوهش‌های علم و دین 23830646 16 2 2026 01 21 Cognitive Theology: A Novel Approach to Religious Understanding الهیات شناختی: رویکردی نوین در فهم دین 11870 10.30465/srs.2026.52094.2218 FA عیسی محمدی نیا استادیار گروه فلسفه و کلام اسلامی دانشگاه مازندران، بابلسر، مازندران، ایران 0009-0000-9548-2011 Journal Article 2025 05 30 Abstract; Advances in neuroscience and cognitive psychology over the past two decades have made it possible to scientifically investigate the phenomenon of religion. In contrast, revelatory knowledge in Islam claims to offer transcendent truths. Employing an analytical-synthetic method, this study explores how findings from the cognitive sciences can be utilized to gain a deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying the reception and processing of religious knowledge, as well as religious practices, without falling into reductive approaches. The findings indicate that cognitive mechanisms such as "Theory of Mind," "Hyperactive Agency Detection," and the "Purpose-Based Inference System" play a significant role in explaining how religious beliefs are formed. Accordingly, by proposing a "Three-Level Model"—comprising the neuroscientific, psychological, and theological levels—this study demonstrates that the longitudinal interaction of these levels can lead to a more comprehensive understanding of religion. Furthermore, this research examines the challenges facing such an interaction, including the problem of reductionism, cultural diversity, and cognitive fallibility, and offers strategies to address them. The results suggest that the interaction between cognitive sciences and religious knowledge not only leads to a deeper understanding of religion but also may pave the way for the emergence of a new branch in interdisciplinary religious studies termed "Cognitive Theology." This approach could enrich both the domains of science and religion and open new horizons in religious research. Keywords: Cognitive Science of Religion, Revelatory Knowledge, Cognitive Mechanisms, Biology of Religion, Cognitive Theology. 1. Introduction In the contemporary era, remarkable advancements in cognitive science and neuroscience have posed challenges to traditional understandings of religion. The cognitive science of religion, as an interdisciplinary field, employs empirical methods to explain the neuro-psychological foundations of religious beliefs and experiences. In contrast, the revelatory knowledge of Islam, emphasizing its supernatural origin, immunity from distortion, and alignment with human fitrah (primordial nature), claims to convey truths beyond the reach of purely empirical methods. This apparent opposition forms the central problem of the present research: How can the findings of cognitive science be utilized to gain a deeper understanding of the mechanisms for receiving and processing religious knowledge, without falling into scientific reductionism? Assuming the validity of Islamic revelatory knowledge as its theological premise, this article seeks to provide a framework for a constructive interaction between these two domains, rather than a confrontational one. 2. Materials and Methods This research is theoretical in nature and employs an analytic-synthetic method. The research process was organized in three stages: - Data Collection: Using a library-based method, sources in two main domains were reviewed: 1. Sources in the cognitive science of religion, focusing on foundational theories (By-product Theory, Direct Adaptation Theory) and key mechanisms such as the Hyperactive Agency Detection Device (HADD), Theory of Mind (ToM), and narrative memory. 2. Islamic sources (philosophical, theological, and exegetical) centered on concepts like revelation (wahy), primordial nature (fitrah), infallibility ('ismah), and material vs. agent causes. - Data Analysis: Data from each domain were analyzed separately by questioning their relation to understanding religion. In cognitive science, the distinction between explaining the "how" of belief formation and its metaphysical "why" was emphasized. In Islamic thought, focus was placed on concepts amenable to dialogue with scientific findings (e.g., fitrah, sacred intellect). - Synthesis and Modeling: The final product of this stage was the design of a "Three-Level Model of Interaction" which establishes a hierarchical and transcendent relationship between different levels of analysis. 3. Discussion and Results The findings of this research can be summarized in several key areas: 1. Explaining Foundational Mechanisms: The cognitive science of religion provides valuable tools such as HADD (explaining the tendency for agent-based interpretations of phenomena) and ToM (explaining the ability to conceive of supernatural beings with minds) for understanding how religious beliefs are formed. 2. Proposing an Interaction Model: The most significant achievement of this article is presenting the "Three-Level Model," which includes: - The Neuro-cognitive Level: Examining the material conditions and biological mechanisms of the brain (material causes). - The Psychological Level: Analyzing the mental and cognitive processes that shape belief. - The Theological Level: Explaining the philosophical-theological foundations, the agent cause, and the ultimate meaning of the religious phenomenon. - The relationship between these levels is hierarchical; meaning that a higher level encompasses and elevates the lower level, rather than being in contradiction with it. 3. Case Study Analysis: Applying this model to analyze Islamic prayer (Salat) demonstrated how this ritual can be understood simultaneously as a neurological phenomenon (regulating brain activity), a psychological one (enhancing cognition and emotion), and a theological one (connection with God and spiritual purification). 4. Analysis of Challenges: The most important challenges facing this interaction were identified and analyzed in light of the proposed model. These include scientific reductionism, cognitive fallibility versus the theory of infallibility ('ismah), cultural diversity in religious experiences, and, notably, the emerging challenge of "epistemic incompatibility" (conflating the psychological genealogy of a belief with its epistemic justification). 4. Conclusion This research demonstrated that a confrontational approach towards cognitive science and religious knowledge is not a suitable solution. Conversely, the Three-Level Model, by differentiating levels of analysis, enables the utilization of empirical findings without falling into the trap of reductionism. Accordingly: - Explanations at the neuro-cognitive and psychological levels clarify the necessary conditions and the "how" of the realization of a religious phenomenon, but they do not answer questions about its ultimate cause and transcendent meaning (theological level). - The crucial distinction between the "psychological genealogy of a belief" and its "epistemic justification" provides a definitive response to the challenge of epistemic incompatibility. The natural origin of a belief is not, in itself, evidence for its truth or falsehood. - Theological concepts like fitrah can be reinterpreted through dialogue with universal cognitive data, and the theory of infallibility can find a more complex and profound explanation by distinguishing between fallible conceptual perception (idrak hussuli) and a divinely granted intuitive perception (idrak hudhuri). Consequently, this study affirms that a critical-constructive interaction between these two fields can not only lead to a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon of religion but also pave the way for the emergence of a new branch titled "Cognitive Theology" within the realm of interdisciplinary religious studies. This approach both respects the sanctity and authenticity of revelatory knowledge and acknowledges the cognitive complexities of contemporary humanity. Future research can continue this path by empirically testing hypotheses derived from this model and developing an "Islamic Cognitive Theology Research Program." پیشرفت‌های دو دهه اخیر در علوم اعصاب و روان‌شناسی شناختی، امکان بررسی علمی پدیده دین را فراهم کرده ‌است. در مقابل، معارف وحیانی اسلام مدعی ارائه حقایقی فراتجربی است. این پژوهش با روش تحلیلی- تلفیقی، به بررسی این مسئله می‌پردازد که چگونه می‌توان از یافته‌های علوم شناختی برای فهم عمیق‌تر مکانیسم‌های دریافت و پردازش معارف دینی و حتی اعمال دینی بهره برد، بدون آنکه دچار تقلیل‌گرایی شد. یافته‌های تحقیق نشان می‌دهد مکانیسم‌های شناختی مانند «نظریه ذهن»، «تشخیص عاملیت افراطی» و «سامانه استنتاج هدف‌مند» در تبیین چگونگی شکل‌گیری باورهای دینی نقش مهمی دارند. لذا با ارائه «مدل سطوح سه‌گانه» - شامل سطوح عصب‌شناختی، روان‌شناختی و الهیاتی - نشان می‌دهد این سطوح در تعامل طولی می‌توانند به فهمی جامع‌ از دین منجر شوند. همچنین، این تحقیق چالش‌های پیش‌روی این تعامل، از جمله مسئله تقلیل‌گرایی، تنوع فرهنگی و خطاپذیری شناختی را بررسی کرده و راهکارهایی برای مواجهه با آنها ارائه می‌دهد. نتایج نشان می‌دهد تعامل علوم شناختی و معارف دینی نه تنها به درک عمیق‌تری از دین می‌انجامد، بلکه می‌تواند زمینه‌ساز ظهور شاخه‌ای جدید با عنوان «الهیات شناختی» در مطالعات بین‌رشته‌ای دین باشد. این رویکرد می‌تواند به غنای هر دو حوزه علم و دین بیفزاید و افق‌های جدیدی در پژوهش‌های دینی بگشاید.

پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی ومطالعات فرهنگی پژوهش‌های علم و دین 23830646 16 2 2026 01 21 A comparative comparison of religious narratives and scientific perspectives on the origin of man: from creation to life. مقایسه تطبیقی روایت‌های دینی و دیدگاه‌های علمی درباره منشأ انسان: از خلقت تا تکامل 11871 10.30465/srs.2026.53424.2256 FA یاسر بخشیان استادیار گروه آموزش الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، تهران، ایران. صندوق پستی 889 - 14665 0009-0007-8392-9809 زینب دهقان استادیار گروه آموزش زیست شناسی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، تهران، ایران. صندوق پستی 889 - 14665 0009-0005-9559-9005 شیرین لطفی پناه استادیار گروه آموزش زیست شناسی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، تهران، ایران. صندوق پستی 889 - 14665 Journal Article 2025 11 12 Abstract: The inquiry into human origins represents a fundamental intersection of empirical biology, transcendental philosophy, and revealed theology. This study examines the perceived dichotomy between the teleological narratives of Abrahamic traditions—specifically within the framework of Islamic philosophy and mysticism and the non-teleological mechanisms of evolutionary biology. By employing a comparative-interdisciplinary methodology, the research analyzes how religious concepts of purposeful creation and Khilafah (vicegerency) can be dialogically positioned alongside Darwinian concepts of natural selection and genetic mutation. The findings suggest that while methodological boundaries differ, there is a significant conceptual space for integrative models such as theistic evolution. The study concludes that a multidimensional anthropology, which respects both biological how and metaphysical why, provides a more robust understanding of the human phenomenon than any reductionist approach. Keywords: Creationism; Evolutionary Biology; Islamic Philosophy; Transcendent Wisdom; Intelligent Design; Epistemological Integration. Introduction: The question of human provenance is not merely a biological puzzle but an ontological inquiry into the nature of being. Historically, the narrative of human origins was the exclusive domain of religion and philosophy, framing humanity as a special creation with an inherent spiritual essence. In Islamic thought, particularly in the works of Ibn Arabi and Mulla Sadra, the human being is viewed as the Microcosm (al-Kawn al-Jami), representing the pinnacle of a hierarchical existential ascent. However, the advent of the Darwinian revolution in the 19th century introduced a paradigm shift, replacing teleological intentionality with blind physical processes. This has led to a persistent intellectual tension: can the biological continuity of the human species be reconciled with the theological claim of human exceptionalism? This study moves beyond the conflict thesis to investigate how different epistemological frameworks address the multidimensionality of human existence, seeking a synthesis that honors both empirical rigor and spiritual depth. Materials and Methods: This research utilizes a qualitative, analytical-comparative framework. The primary theological and philosophical dataset is derived from the Quranic corpus and the school of Transcendent Wisdom (al-Hikmah al-Mutaaliyah), focusing on the concept of gradual existential perfection. On the scientific side, the study draws from contemporary evolutionary synthesis and the philosophy of science. The methodological approach involves three stages: 1. Conceptual Mapping: Defining Creation and Evolution to avoid semantic equivocation.2. Methodological Demarcation: Distinguishing between empirical proximate causes and metaphysical ultimate causes.3. Integrative Analysis: Evaluating the coherence of Guided Evolution and Intelligent Design as bridging frameworks. Discussion and Results: The analysis reveals several critical points of convergence and divergence: 1. Process and Gradualism: A significant finding is that both perspectives reject instantaneous appearance. Traditional Islamic philosophy, especially through Mulla Sadra’s Substantial Motion (al-harakah al-jawhariyyah), posits that the soul emerges through the gradual intensification of matter. This provides a sophisticated metaphysical parallel to biological gradualism, suggesting that evolution could be viewed as the material substrate of a spiritual process. 2. The Question of Teleology: This remains the primary point of divergence. Evolutionary biology, by definition, excludes final causes (telos). However, the study argues that this is a methodological restriction rather than an ontological negation. Theistic Evolution serves as a viable result here, proposing that natural selection is the mechanism through which divine providence operates within the spatiotemporal realm. 3. Human Dignity and the Soul: While biology identifies the Homo sapiens as a primate, religious narratives define the Insan through the Divine Breath. The results suggest that these are not contradictory but occupy different levels of reality. The biological account explains the origin of the container (the body), while the religious account explains the origin of the content (the self-conscious spirit). Conclusion: The study concludes that the conflict between creation and evolution is often a product of category errors-treating scientific descriptions as totalizing metaphysical statements, or treating religious metaphors as literal biological manuals. By adopting an Epistemological Pluralism, we can acknowledge that evolutionary biology provides a comprehensive account of the human's physical lineage, while religion and philosophy provide the necessary framework for understanding human value, morality, and ultimate destiny. A holistic anthropology must therefore be interdisciplinary, viewing evolution not as the replacement of creation, but as the magnificent process through which the creative act unfolds over cosmic time. مسئله منشأ و جایگاه انسان از دیرزمان یکی از بنیادی‌ترین پرسش‌ها در حوزه‌های دین، فلسفه و علم بوده است. در سنت‌های ابراهیمی، انسان موجودی برگزیده و روحانی معرفی می‌شود که آفرینش او با هدفی الهی و در فرایندی تدریجی و هدفمند صورت گرفته است. این دیدگاه، انسان را نه صرفاً موجودی زیستی، بلکه حامل روح الهی و نماینده خداوند در زمین می‌داند. در فلسفه اسلامی، انسان موجودی مرکب از ماده و معناست که با سیر تکاملی عقلانی و وجودی، از مرتبه‌ی محسوس به مرتبه‌ی تعقل و شهود می‌رسد و غایت او، تحقق کمال نهایی وجود خویش است. در عرفان اسلامی نیز، آفرینش انسان تجلی اسماء و صفات الهی تلقی می‌شود و هدف نهایی آن، دستیابی به مقام «انسان کامل» است که جامع همه‌ی مراتب هستی و مظهر تامّ حقیقت الهی است. در مقابل، علم جدید و به‌ویژه زیست‌شناسی تکاملی، منشأ انسان را در چارچوب تحولات طبیعی و فرایند انتخاب طبیعی توضیح می‌دهد و ظهور انسان را نتیجه‌ی پیوسته‌ای از تغییرات زیستی می‌داند. این دیدگاه بر جنبه‌های تجربی و مادی تأکید دارد و کمتر به ابعاد متافیزیکی یا غایی آفرینش می‌پردازد. پژوهش حاضر با رویکردی میان‌رشته‌ای و تطبیقی، به تحلیل تطبیقی دیدگاه‌های دینی، فلسفی و عرفانی در کنار یافته‌های زیست‌شناسی تکاملی می‌پردازد تا نسبت میان خلقت و تکامل را روشن سازد. نتایج نشان می‌دهد که هرچند هر دو رویکرد در پذیرش نوعی نظم، قانون‌مندی و فرایند تدریجی خلقت هم‌نظرند، اما در تبیین ماهیت انسان، نقش روح، غایت وجود و خاستگاه معنا تفاوت‌های بنیادین دارند. در این میان، نظریه‌های تلفیقی مانند «تکامل هدایت‌شده» و «طراحی هوشمند» می‌کوشند تا میان علم و دین پلی مفهومی برقرار کنند و از دوگانگی مطلق میان خلقت دینی و تکامل علمی بکاهند. در نهایت، این پژوهش تأکید می‌کند که فهم منشأ و جایگاه انسان تنها از رهگذر گفت‌وگوی میان‌رشته‌ای و بازخوانی هم‌زمان مفاهیم دینی، فلسفی و علمی ممکن است. چنین رویکردی می‌تواند به درکی جامع‌تر، عمیق‌تر و هماهنگ‌تر از حقیقت انسان و مسیر تکامل او بینجامد.

پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی ومطالعات فرهنگی پژوهش‌های علم و دین 23830646 16 2 2026 03 19 A Comparative Study of the Abrahamic Religions' Perspectives on Genetics and Gene Therapy بررسی تطبیقی دیدگاه ادیان ابراهیمی درباره علم ژنتیک و ژن‌درمانی 12145 10.30465/srs.2026.50536.2186 FA امیرحسان یحیی پور گروه بیوتکنولوژی، دانشگاه تحصیلات تکمیلی صنعتی و فناوری پیشرفته، کرمان، ایران 0009-0008-2285-9074 ستایش سادات حسینی گروه بیوتکنولوژی، دانشگاه تحصیلات تکمیلی صنعتی و فناوری پیشرفته، کرمان، ایران محمدمهدی یعقوبی دانشگاه تحصیلات تکمیلی صنعتی و فناوری پیشرفته، کرمان، ایران 0000-0003-1434-6224 ناهید عسکری دانشیار ژنتیک، دانشگاه تحصیلات تکمیلی صنعتی و فناوری پیشرفته، کرمان، ایران 0000-0001-8433-9439 Journal Article 2024 11 19 Abstract The science of genetics is defined as the transfer of biological material from one cell to another or across generations. Religious scholars were among the first to challenge and critically examine this science, as the public's acceptance of genetic hypotheses is often contingent upon their beliefs and creeds. Consequently, religion plays a fundamental role in shaping societal attitudes and perspectives. This study aims to investigate the viewpoints of major religions, with a particular focus on Islam, concerning the science of genetics. Findings indicate that while Christianity and Judaism express the most significant opposition to gene therapy, Islam, in contrast, regards it as a permissible method for correcting or eliminating incurable diseases and sanctions all its forms. There are narrations in Islamic tradition that allude to genetics and the transmission of traits, which hold considerable importance. This perspective views science as a way to improve human life; however, it strictly prohibits its misuse and establishes regulations to prevent the corruption and oppression that would arise from non-compliance. Keywords: Genetics, Gene Therapy, Cloning, Islam, Christianity Introduction Remarkable advancements in genetic science, particularly in the fields of genetic engineering and gene therapy, have opened new horizons for treating diseases and improving the quality of human life. These technologies, which involve the manipulation, modification, or replacement of defective genes, hold the potential to cure previously intractable genetic disorders. However, the ability to intervene in the most fundamental codes of life has raised profound ethical and philosophical questions. On one hand, these technologies contribute to producing better food, reducing undesirable traits, and treating diseases. On the other hand, critics have raised serious concerns, citing reasons such as altering creation and the potential for corruption on Earth (Bastani & Rezai, 2020; Rousta Sadrabadi et al., 2018). Since religions play a fundamental role in shaping the value systems of societies and individuals' attitudes towards emerging phenomena, examining their perspectives in this area is essential. This article, using a comparative approach, analyzes and evaluates the positions of the Abrahamic religions (Islam, Christianity, and Judaism) regarding genetic science, gene therapy, and cloning. The main objective is to elucidate the ethical and jurisprudential frameworks of each religion through their specialized bodies, identify points of commonality and divergence, and understand the theological reasons behind each viewpoint to determine which of these religions adopts a more restrictive or flexible approach in this domain (Bahrami Khoshkar, 2012). Materials & Methods This research was conducted using a descriptive-analytical and comparative method. Data was collected from authoritative library and documentary sources. The primary materials for this study include the sacred texts of each religion, their interpretations, and, specifically, the opinions and fatwas of contemporary religious authorities and jurisprudential institutions. In Judaism, reference has been made to the body of Halakhic laws, the writings of rabbis, and the positions of Jewish bioethics institutions. In Christianity, official statements from the Vatican, positions of the Orthodox Churches, and the views of prominent theologians from various Protestant denominations have been examined. In Islam, the verses of the Holy Quran, Prophetic hadiths, jurisprudential principles, and the fatwas of Shia Maraji' (sources of emulation) and Sunni religious institutions (such as Al-Azhar University in Egypt) have been analyzed. The research method is based on a systematic comparison of these views in three key areas: somatic cell gene therapy, germline gene therapy, and therapeutic and human cloning. Discussion and Result The results of the comparative analysis indicate a spectrum of views, from conditional acceptance to staunch opposition, rooted in the theological principles of each religion. The prevailing approach in Judaism, based on the principle of "the duty to heal" and the human obligation to preserve life, is positive. Most Jewish thinkers permit gene therapy for improving life, arguing that this act is not considered a forbidden mixing of species (Rahmani Manshadi & Jafari Nadoushan, 2018). Regarding germline cells, many also deem it permissible for preventing severe hereditary diseases, citing that the embryo in its early stages lacks full human personhood. Furthermore, due to the high prevalence of certain genetic diseases in the Ashkenazi Jewish population, this community has been very active in human genetics research (Charrow, 2004). In Christianity, the attitude is considerably stricter. While the Catholic Church accepts somatic cell gene therapy, it strongly opposes any manipulation of germline cells and all forms of human cloning, citing the violation of human dignity, the usurpation of God's role, and the destruction of the family institution (Islami, 2005). The Orthodox denomination, citing the necessity of respecting the dignity of the fetus, does not permit the therapeutic type (Moeinifar, 2012). Conservative or Evangelical Protestants also consider this practice immoral, believing it destroys the divine and sacred aspect of life (Jones, 2001). In contrast, liberal branches of Protestantism hold a more flexible position. A common thread among almost all Christian denominations is the firm distinction between "therapy" and "enhancement," the latter of which they deem unacceptable (Panuntun, 2020). Finally, Islam, with its emphasis on acquiring knowledge and utilizing divine blessings to improve life, has a supportive yet regulated approach. The overwhelming majority of Shia and Sunni jurists consider gene therapy for treating diseases to be permissible (ja'iz) and even recommended (mustahabb). Although some opponents view this as interference in God's creation (Rahmani Manshadi & Jafari Nadoushan, 2018), the argument of "changing God's creation" (An-Nisa/119) is rejected by most exegetes. In Islamic tradition, there are also hadiths indicating the influence of heredity (Faiz Kashani; Helli). Ayatollah Khamenei has stressed the importance of this technology and has confirmed its permissibility provided it does not cause significant harm. On the other hand, Al-Azhar University in Egypt also permits research aimed at diagnosis and treatment but opposes the enhancement of physical characteristics. While there are differing jurisprudential views in Islam, most jurists seek a middle ground to balance therapeutic needs with ethical principles (Qanbarpoor & Naqibi, 2022). Based on the jurisprudential principle of "the presumption of permissibility" (Asl al-Ibahah), some jurists consider genetic procedures to be without religious prohibition (Basiri & Gohari, 2014; Mortazavi Rad et al., 2020). Islam strictly forbids any use of this technology that would disfigure the beautiful face of creation (Javadi Amoli) or be used to create biological weapons (Bastani & Rezai, 2020). Conclusion All three Abrahamic religions converge on accepting somatic cell gene therapy for the purpose of treating disease. This shared position demonstrates the precedence of the principle of preserving life and alleviating human suffering in these faiths. The main point of divergence begins with issues related to germline manipulation, embryo research, and cloning, which are directly linked to the ontological and ethical status of the fetus. Christianity, by ascribing full human personhood to the embryo from the moment of conception, adopts the strictest position. Judaism and Islam, with a developmental view of the fetus, exhibit greater flexibility. Among them, it appears that Islam, by relying on flexible jurisprudential principles, has a broader capacity for accepting genetic technologies, provided they are employed within the framework of ethics, justice, and the supreme interests of humanity. علم ژنتیک، انتقال محتوای زیستی از یک سلول به سلولی دیگر یا به نسل‌های آینده تعریف می‌شود. اولین افرادی که این علم را به چالش کشیده و آن را نقد و بررسی کردند، اندیشمندان دینی بودند که پذیرش فرضیه‌های ژنتیکی از سوی مردم جامعه، عمدتاً به باور و عقاید آن‌ها بستگی داشت. ازاین‌روی، مذهب نقشی اساسی در نگرش و جهت‌گیری افکار جامعه دارد. در این مطالعه قصد داریم که دیدگاه ادیان بزرگ را با تمرکز بر اسلام، در ارتباط با دانش ژنتیک بررسی کنیم. مسیحیت و یهودیت بیشترین مخالفت را با ژن‌درمانی دارند و در مقابل، اسلام ژن‌درمانی را روشی برای اصلاح یا ازبین‌بردن بیماری‌های صعب‌العلاج دانسته و تمامی انواع این امر را جایز می‌شمارد. روایاتی در اسلام به ژنتیک و انتقال صفات اشاره دارد که حائز اهمیت بوده و این علم را راهی برای بهبود زندگی بشر می‌داند؛ اما انسان را از سوءاستفاده آن منع کرده و قوانینی را وضع می‌کند که عدم پیروی از آن‌ها فساد و ظلم را به همراه دارد.