1 ‘Could we worship a non-human-centred impersonal cosmic purpose?’ Tim Mulgan NOTE: This is the final pre-publication draft of Mulgan, T., 2022, ‘Could we worship a non-human-centred impersonal cosmic purpose?’ in Personal and A-Personal Aspects of the Divine, G. Gasser and S. Kittle (eds.), Routledge, pp. 285-302. Please cite the published version. My central question in this paper is whether a non-human-centred God and/or an impersonal cosmic purpose (and/or the ground or source of such a purpose) could be an appropriate object of worship, and play the same religious, spiritual, or moral roles as the benevolent God of traditional Abrahamic theism. The paper proceeds as follows. Section 1 introduces my Ananthropocentric Purposivist alternative to both theism and atheism. Section 2 introduces current philosophical debates about worship and worship-worthiness. Sections 3 and 4 introduce my own particular conceptions of worship and worship-worthiness, which are then defended in Section 5. Section 6 sketches the cumulative philosophical case for Ananthropocentric Purposivism. Section 7 argues that the Ananthropocentric Purposivist God is worthy of worship. Finally, Section 8 argues that we can actually worship such as God. 1. Introducing Ananthropocentric Purposivism. One exciting development in recent philosophy of religion is the emergence of alternatives to both theism and atheism. Traditional Western Abrabamic mono-theism posits an Omni-God: ‘God is a necessarily existing person without a body who necessarily is eternal, perfectly free, omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good, and the creator of all things.’ (Swinburne 2004: 7) God is also assumed to be benevolent to individual human beings, to have plans for our lives, to take an interest in our fate, and so on. For simplicity, I label this view ‘Benevolent Theism’ (BT). BT posits this particular Omni-God. By contrast, atheism rejects all supernatural entities, explanations, values, or purposes. There is thus logical space between BT and atheism. Could