Ontological Foundations of Cosmological Inquiry: Al-Attas’s Response to Naturalism in Modern Science

Miqdad Hamid Al Anshory; Muhammad Faqih Nidzom; Usmanul Khakim

doi:10.15408/refleksi.v25.i1.52361

Authors

Miqdad Hamid Al Anshory University of Darussalam Gontor, Ponorogo, Indonesia
Muhammad Faqih Nidzom University of Darussalam Gontor, Ponorogo, Indonesia
Usmanul Khakim University of Darussalam Gontor, Ponorogo, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15408/refleksi.v25.i1.52361

Keywords:

Ontological Foundation, Cosmological Inquiry, Al-Attas, Naturalism, Modern Science

Abstract

Contemporary cosmology is often presented as a scientifically objective and metaphysically neutral enterprise, yet some influential interpretations rely on naturalistic assumptions about reality, causality, and existence. This article argues that cosmological inquiry is never ontologically neutral and therefore requires an explicit ontological foundation. Using a philosophical-analytical approach combining conceptual analysis and comparative metaphysical inquiry, this study critically examines ontological naturalism as an influential philosophical interpretation of modern science and evaluates its adequacy in addressing contingency, ultimate causality, intelligibility, and the ontological status of the universe. In response to these limitations, the article reconstructs an alternative ontological perspective drawn from Islamic metaphysics, particularly as articulated by Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, grounded in the distinction between the Necessary Being (wājib al-wujūd) and contingent existence (mumkin al-wujūd). This author-developed reconstruction yields a three-layered model of cosmological explanation: physical, causal-ontological, and symbolic-metaphysical, through which the universe is understood as contingent, intelligible, and meaningful. The study concludes that advancing cosmological inquiry does not require excluding metaphysics but recognizing that every cosmological explanation presupposes an ontology, and that Islamic metaphysics offers a coherent foundation for understanding the universe.

References

Al-Attas, Syed Muhammad Naquib. A Commentary on the Hujjat Al-Siddiq of Nur Al-Din Al-Raniri. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Culture, 1986.

———. Islam and Secularism. Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 1993.

———. Islam and the Philosophy of Science. Malaysia: International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC), 1989.

———. Prolegomena To the Metaphysics of Islam: An Exposition of the Fundamental Elements of the Worldview of Islam. Kuala Lumpur: ISTAC, 1995.

———. The Positive Aspects of Tasawwuf. Kuala Lumpur: Islamic Academy of Science, 1981.

Albert, David. “‘On the Origin of Everything,’ Review of A Universe from Nothing, by Lawrence M. Krauss,.” The New York Times Sunday Book Review, 2012. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/a-universe-from-nothing-by-lawrence-m-krauss.html.

Altaie, Mohammed Basil. God, Nature and Cause: Essay on Islam and Science. UEA: Kalam Research & Media, 2016.

Audi, Robert, ed. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. Second ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Avicenna. The Metaphysics of Healing. Edited by Michael E. Marmura. Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press, 2005.

Barbour, Ian G. Religion and Science: Historical and Contemporary Issues. New York: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996.

Beresford, Mark J. “Medical Reductionism: Lessons from the Great Philosophers.” QJM: An International Journal of Medicine 103, no. 9 (2010): 721–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcq057.

Bertens, Kees. Ringkasan Sejarah Filsafat. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Kanisius, 1975.

Blackburn, Simon. The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Second ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Burtt, Edwin Arthur. The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science: A Historical and Critical Essay. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, 1924.

Capra, Fritjof. The Turning Point: Science, Society and the Rising Culture. New York: Bantam Books, 1983.

Caro, Mario De. “Between the Placement Problem and the Reconciliation Problem. Philosophical Naturalism Today.” Topoi 42 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-023-09913-6.

Carrol, Sean. The Big Picture: On the Origins of Life, Meaning, and the Universe Itself. New York: Dutton, 2016.

———. “Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?” The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Physics, 2018.

Chamcham, Khalil, Joseph Silk, John D. Barrow, and Simon Saunders, ed. The Philosophy of Cosmology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316535783.

Clark, Kelly James. Religion and the Sciences of Origins: Historical and Contemporary Discussions. United States: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137414816.

———. The Blackwell Companion to Naturalism. UK: Wiley Blackwell, 2016.

Cox, Harvey. The Secular City. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013.

Deckert, Michael Esfeld and Dirk-Andre. A Minimalist Ontology of the Natural World. New York: Routledge, 2018.

Efendi, Rahmi Maldini, Eva Dewi, and Arini Rahman. “The Epistemological Reconstruction of Tawhid in the Thought of Ismail Raji Al-Faruqi: The Basis for the Integration of Religion and Science in the Globalization Era.” Refleksi: Jurnal Kajian Agama Dan Filsafat 24, no. 2 (2025). https://doi.org/10.15408/refleksi.v24.i2.49179.

Ellis, George F. R. “The Domain of Cosmology and the Testing of Cosmological Theories.” In The Philosophy of Cosmology, edited by and Simon Saunders Khalil Chamcham, Joseph Silk, John D. Barrow. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Garcia-Bellido, Juan. “Modern Cosmology,” 2024.

Ghazāli, Abu Hāmid Al. The Incoherence of the Philosophers. Edited by Michael E. Marmura. Second. Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press, 2000.

Grant, Edward. A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Grunbaum, Adolf. “The Pseudo-Problem of Creation in Physical Cosmology.” Philosophy of Science 56, no. 3 (1989).

Ismail, Mohd Zaidi. “The Cosmos as the Created Book and Its Implications for the Orientation of Science.” Islam and Science 6, no. 1 (2008).

Jacquette, Dale. Ontology. London and New York: Routledge, 2014.

———. The Philosophy of Mind: The Metaphysics of Consciousness. London: Continuum, 2009.

Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

———. Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Kartanegara, Mulyadhi. Essentials of Islamic Epistemology: A Philosophical Inquiry into the Foundation of Knowledge. Bandar Seri Begawan: Universiti Brunei Darussalam, 2014.

———. “Islamisasi Ilmu Pengetahuan Dan Telaah Kritis Terhadap Epistemologi Barat.” Refleksi: Jurnal Kajian Agama Dan Filsafat 1, no. 3 (1999).

———. Lentera Kehidupan: Panduan Memahami Tuhan, Alam Dan Manusia. Bandung: Mizan, 2017.

Kojonen, Erkki V. R. “Methodological Naturalism and the Truth Seeking Objection.” International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 81, no. 3 (2017). https://doi.org /10.1007/s11153-016-9575-0.

Krauss, Lawrence M. A Universe From Nothing: Why There Is Something Rather than Nothing. New York: Free Press, 2012.

Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. The Principles of Nature and Grace. Edited by Roger Ariew and Daniel Garber. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 1989.

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein. An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines. New York: state University of New York Press, 1993.

———. Man and Nature: The Spiritual Crisis in Modern Man. London: Unwin Paperbacks, 1968.

———. The Need for a Sacred Science. United Kingdom: Curzon Press, 1995.

Page, Don N. “Cosmological Ontology and Epistemology.” ArXiv: History and Philosophy of Physics, no. December (2014): 317–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316535783.017.

Peebles, P.J.E. The Whole Truth: A Cosmologist’s Reflections on the Search for Objective Reality. Princeton & Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2022.

Peterson, Gregory R. “Demarcation and the Scientistic Fallacy.” Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 38, no. 4 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9744.2003.00536.x.

Plantinga, Alvin. The Nature of Necessity. London: Oxford University Press, 1974.

Plantinga, Alvin. Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, & Naturalism. International Perspectives on Science, Culture, and Belief. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.

Robinson., Richard N. Williams and Daniel N. Scientism: The New Ortodoxy. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015.

Rouse, Joseph. Articulating the World: Conceptual Understanding and the Scientific Image. London: The University of Chicago Press, 2015.

Slavov, Matias. “Universal Gravitation and the (Un) Intelligibility of Natural Philosophy.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 101 (2020). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/papq.12300.

Swoyer, Chris. “The Nature of Natural Laws.” Australian Journal of Philosophy 60, no. 3 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1080/00048408212340641.

Vladlenova, Iliana, and Eduard Kalnytskyi. “Model of the Universe: Ontological and Physical Problems.” Philosophy and Cosmology 28, no. December 2021 (2022): 42–50. https://doi.org/10.29202/phil-cosm/28/4.

Whitehead, Alfred North. Science and the Modern World. New York: Free Press, 1967.

Wigner, Eugene. “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences,.” Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics 13, no. 1 (1960).

Williams, Richard N., and Daniel N. Robinson. Scientism: The New Orthodoxy. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015.