Dan Poynter Global Ebook Award Finalist

About The Heaven at the End of Science

Thirty-five years in the making, The Heaven at the End of Science purports to do the impossible: overturn the materialistic worldview of modern science and replace it with a new worldview that joins the scientific enterprise with religion. Heavily researched, well-documented, and carefully thought out, the book is intended to engage the reader with the nature and extent of the evidence supporting this new worldview. The Big Bang theory and Darwinian evolution, among other prized theories of modern science, go by the wayside as the book outlines a theory to better explain the physical world we live in. The writer, Philip Mereton, is a practicing lawyer with a Philosophy degree (Beloit College 1978) who challenges modern scientific theorists to a debate, and structured the book’s argument not to just to raise questions or point out a few gaps in science’s world picture, but to win the debate.

Recent News & Events


ApexReviews.net | Reviewed By Dominique Sessons

Official Apex Reviews Rating: 5 Stars

For years, we have been led to believe that the universe traces its roots back to the Big Bang, a cataclysmic explosion of ethereal energy that resulted in the formation of the planets, stars, and everything in-between. Suppose, though, that the cosmos wasn’t, in fact, borne of a random eruption — but rather stems from the ever-evolving imagination of a multi-dimensional dreaming mind? Such a drastically different perspective would no doubt change the way we see not only ourselves, but also our place in the infinite realm of the universe.

Such is the central premise of The Heaven At The End Of Science, the eye-opening new offering from author Philip Mereton. Probing, well written, and thoroughly researched, Mereton’s insightful volume serves as a treatise on the popular misconceptions that the world of science would lead us to believe about the origins — and subsequent development — of the universe. More than just the simple remnants of ancient star dust, Mereton paints the compelling picture of life as a purposeful, directed means to an end. Bolstered by a wide range of enlightening sources, including religion, eastern philosophy — and science itself— The Heaven At The End Of Science breaks important ground regarding the limited purview of life as we’ve come to know it, encouraging readers to explore the unfettered depths of a new vision of universal purpose. A highly recommended read.

Press Release


Contact: Cathy Minardi, Tel: (904-230-3299) cminardi01@bellsouth.net

New Book Challenges Big Bang, Darwinism and Creationism

Chicago, IL – November 10, 2010—The Heaven at the End of Science An Argument for a New Worldview of Hope, by Philip Mereton takes a fresh and bold look at the debate between science and religion—and attempts to go farther than any other book to unite them.

Instead of trying to show that religion is wrong because science is better at finding truth, or that science must be wrong because it leaves out God, this new book shows that if we eliminate the unnecessary assumptions of our modern, materialistic worldview, we wind up finding a way to connect the logical rigor of science with the hopes and dreams of religion. The Heaven at the End of Science says that instead of viewing the universe as a random outcome of the Big Bang or as a special creation from the hand of God, why not see if we can explain the world as a powerful dream emerging from a universal mind, a mind some call God? It provokes the reader to think about the big questions, and inspire many to reach for higher goals only achievable in a dream world. This book gives a completely different perspective than modern science.

About the Author: Philip Mereton is a practicing lawyer with a philosophy degree whose mission in life is to expose the fallacies in our current materialistic world view and to advance to more promising—and rational—outlook. In pursuit of that mission, he spent 30 years studying the foundational ideas to our current scientific world view and developing the arguments made in this book. Download a PDF version of this Press Release

Editor Note: Review copies and interviews with author arranged on request.

Title: The Heaven at the End of Science ISBN: 978-0-615-29173-4

Publisher: Distant Drums Press

Paperback (9.0 inches by 6.0 inches) 413 Pages

Price: $19.95

Testimonials for The Heaven at the End of Science

“In The Heaven at the End of Science, Philip Mereton presents a well-argued, strongly documented, and immensely readable critique of the world view we have come to associate with modern science. In addition, he proposes a bold cosmological hypothesis that he finds hospitable to the concerns of both science and religion. I strongly recommend this thoughtful book to anyone interested in these philosophically important matters.”

—Gary A. Cook, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Beloit College


The Heaven at the End of Science lucidly, comprehensively and inspiringly exposes the limits of materialistic science. The author’s ‘Real Dream’ provides an inspiration for a new worldview that transcends these limits.”

—Lawrence Wile, M.D., Director, Chaikin-Wile Foundation

Questions for the Media

1. What Led you to Write this Book?

A deep, overriding conviction that there is one principle – or “Truth” – that unites what we separately classify as the fields of religion, science, and philosophy. I also have an equally deep conviction that there is more hope for this world than the gloomy future modern science says is in store for us. In the end, the reason I wrote the book is that no other book I was aware of expressed the ideas that keep flowing through my mind.

2. What do you mean by gloomy future?

According to the mechanical world-model of modern science both our bodies and the universe at large are machines programmed to eventually run down and die – our bodies through disease and old age, and the Earth through the sun’s ultimate loss of fuel or some other cosmic catastrophe. But there are more immediate ill-effects of the materialistic worldview of modern science.

3. What are these Ill-Effects?

The material science worldview casts us into roles where we are adverse to each other and to the world. We are taught that people of different religions, nationalities, or color are fundamentally different creatures, as most vividly shown by ongoing wars between people of different faith. I believe in the principle that all people, in the end, pray to the same God, and that this principle is deeply true on both a spiritual and scientific level.

4. Do you Really Think you Can Change the Way People Think About the World?

The short answer is, of course, but ideas ultimately change the world, not people. Under the principles of science, if a new idea or theory comes along that better explains worldly phenomena than the current scientific paradigm, then the new idea will gradually replace the older view of things. I am trying to give this new way of looking at things, the “Real Dream worldview,” a forceful thrust out into modern society and see how it does. At the end of the day, the question is what worldview will be left standing?

5. Who were your major influences?

My mother, who gave me the will to fight. I have been inspired by too many books to count, but the list includes Descartes’ Meditations, George Berkeley’s Principles of Human Knowledge, Paul Davies’ God and the New Physics and The Mind of God, Fritjof Capra’s The Tao of Physics, David Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Herman Hesse’s Siddhartha, the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, Phillip Johnson, Darwin on Trial, parts of Hegel’s Phenomenology of Mind and Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, and of course the Bible. Many writers, with their self-assured form of materialism, also inspired me to develop the other side of the argument. These writers include Richard Dawkins, Steven Weinberg, Ernst Mayr, and Heinz Pagels.

6. Who is the Audience for this Book?

I wrote it for everyone, as I do not think the big ideas should be the business only of professors and religious leaders. It will help, however, if the reader has an open mind, or is at least willing to consider another perspective from that presented by modern science. It is also the sort of book, I hope, that becomes easier to understand the more the reader sleep on the ideas it contains.

7. How has Practicing Law Affected How You Wrote this Book?

First, it has provided a source of income. After my first semester in college, I thought I could simply take a few months off and write the book. After finding I had only $40 in my checking account, I concluded freelancing was not going to work. Second, practicing law has given me the discipline to document an argument, stay close to where the evidence leads, and keep the reasoning tight. Realizing that there might be a few people who disagreed with the book’s premise, law practice has made me better at arguing. This skill may come in handy.

8. This Book has Hundreds of Footnotes. Why so Many?

Admittedly, many people (including my wife), want to distant themselves from any book with footnotes, perhaps because of negative associations with textbooks or school. In my case, however, the footnotes are intended to be helpful. To many people, the book may appear to advance a radical proposition. I wanted to show that everything I am saying is supported somewhere in intellectual history and all I am doing inferring from the data in a different direction that than chosen by modern science. The reader does not have to read the footnotes to understand the book, but referring to them now and then may be useful.

9. You Say you Started the Book in 1974. Why did it take so long?

In 1974 I started with an idea and a feeling I was right. The rest of the 35 years I spent trying to understand the ideas and to express the feeling into words. The book was not born whole, but has been an evolving project, where I would find inspiration in the ideas I was writing down and in my research. The inspiration continued piling up; eventually, I had to stop somewhere.

10. Do you Think the Time if Right for this Type of Book?

I think the time is perfect. It is hard not to imagine some form of “clash of civilizations” unless we find common ground among the people of the world. As time goes on, humankind’s awareness of itself and its place in world must rise. We have more people questioning the old truths of organized religion, and finding truth in what science tells us is the “supernatural,” whether the power of attraction, spiritual cures, or Gaia-like beliefs. The Heaven at the End of Science shows that much of what we call the “supernatural” is really natural and that we should stop pretending we live in Newton’s mechanical world, where the universe is a machine and we are robots, programmed only to perpetuate our selfish genes as we march silently into our waiting graves.

Talking Points

  1. Now—at the beginning of a new millennium—might be a good time to re-assess the big theories of modern science that control how we view the world around us.

  2. We don’t seem to give it much thought but scientific materialism, which controls our current way of thinking about the world, is riddled with foundational assumptions that cannot be true. These assumptions are that trillions of tons of matter suddenly burst from the dark void; that mindless processes and physical laws assembled dead particles into mathematical patterns that hold constant for all time; and that life arose from a primordial swamp of dead particles.

  3. Modern science has also given us a host of increasingly bizarre theories that have somehow escaped serious questioning because we have apparently delegated to science professors (and religious leaders) the all-important task of answering the big questions: who we are; where we came from; what the world is made of and where it’s going.

  4. Science’s more bizarre theories include (a) the Big Bang, where enough matter for all the trillions upon trillions of stars in the sky was once condensed into a pinhead, which then miraculously expanded its way into the universe; (b) the inflationary Big Bang, where milliseconds after the initial “bang,” the universe inflated by a factor of 1050 in 10-35 seconds, and then slowed down to track the current expansion; (c) dark matter—or matter no-one can see or sense—which accounts for roughly 95% of the total matter scientists believe exists in the universe; (d) the “many-worlds” theory which holds that our universe is actually one of many trillions of possible universes; and (e) string theory, which holds that the ultimate constituents of matter are not particles, but infinitesimal vibrating strings taking up not four (the 3 spatial dimensions and time) but eleven or so dimensions which of course we never actually experience.

  5. Although we commonly question the opinions of our political leaders, sports coaches, hair stylists, and talk show hosts, we give scientists a free pass when it comes to fundamental theories.

  6. It turns out that when we do question the theories of modern science, they fall apart.

  7. There is a better way to explain the world.

  8. Rather than assume the trillions of stars in the sky burst from the dark void in a miracle known as the Big Bang, why not conclude that the appearance of the trillions of stars in the sky is a product of the united dreaming mind of God?

  9. What if we are God and we have dreamt a world of such overwhelming power and solidity that we have fooled ourselves into thinking we are not dreaming?

  10. In this new millennium, it is time to put the theories of modern science to the test and see if a different perspective better explains the world we see.

  11. This book challenges material scientists to a debate: what theory better explains the world we experience, the materialistic theories of modern science, led by the Big Bang, quantum physics, and Darwinian evolution, or the Real Dream Worldview?

  12. Does the world originate in a Big Bang of matter that came at us, or from the Big Mind and flows from us?

  13. This book carries the dream perspective to its logical conclusion and argues that when we dispense with the unnecessary assumptions of modern science we wind up clearing a path to a true heaven.

  14. This idealistic vision of a future world is also the bedrock principle to a new science.