In a previous blog entitled Logic and Human Constructs, we discussed the uniquely human ability and tendency to create explanations for things that we observe, especially when we are able to link observations in a cause-and-effect manner. For example, a child living on a farm in a rural area may conclude that a rooster crowing causes the sun to come up each day. This is logical to her because every morning she hears the rooster, then shortly thereafter the sun emerges over the horizon. She has fallen victim to what is sometimes called the Post Hoc fallacy, assuming that because one thing precedes another, the first thing caused the second thing.
If the child were able to speak to an ornithologist, she would learn that roosters along with many bird species are quite active at sunrise and sunset. The child could also learn from an anthropologist that many ancient societies including the Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks, Norse and Cherokee developed myths that explained how the sun rose, moved across the sky and set each day. A science teacher could explain to her our modern understanding of spinning planets circumnavigating a star, which is part of a galaxy of stars of which there are billions. But this illustrates how, if humans don’t know the answer, we will create an answer based on what we do know! And as we build a science-based body of knowledge, those old constructs fade away. By the time she’s a teenager, she’ll no longer believe the rooster caused the sun to rise.
Health conditions such as epilepsy were routinely attributed to spirits or demon possession throughout ancient and medieval cultures with treatments often linked to religious rituals. As the scientific process has eliminated many “unknowns” in our world, such as understanding that bacteria and viruses cause many of the diseases that we once attributed to spirits or demons, fewer people believe in those ancient constructs. But what about the underlying religious constructs that supported those constructs at one time. Are they still relevant?
Again, as a society becomes exposed to more evolved bodies of knowledge, those types of constructs begin to wane. This is evidenced by the growing number of people in the U.S. for example that don’t identify with any of the traditional religions. However, our natural tendency to create constructs to fill in the gaps certainly continues.
It is clear that the concept of religion is continually evolving. Early humans were largely polytheistic, meaning they recognized, worshiped or feared a number of gods. The Greek gods, which included Zeus, Aphrodite, Apollo, Poseiden, and many others, along with their Roman counterparts, are probably the most common since many of us studied them in school. But most ancient societies had some type of pantheon of deities. Hinduism is one of the oldest religions in the world and is practiced by about 15% of the world’s population. It carries forward an ancient pantheon of deities.
Later in human evolution, monotheism won out over pantheism, at least in Europe and Middle East. The big three – Judaism, Christianity and Islam – account for 56% of the world’s population. Apart from Hinduism, the rest of the world’s religions make up 5% or less of the world’s population with those that identify as agnostic, non-religious or atheist is now at 15% and growing.
It has always seemed to me that labeling oneself as an atheist, one who lacks belief in God or gods, is as illogical as professing that God speaks to you directly. I can no more prove there is no God as I can prove that God exists. Therefore, we should respect people’s search for meaning in life and for people’s religious constructs in concept. However, if your religion says that, for one reason or another, you must kill me and people like me, or I must choose to convert or die, it is illogical to support that religion. The ideal culture has both freedom of religion and freedom from religion.
The future of religion is likely not going to be a revival of one of the ancient religions like Hinduism, nor will Christianity or Islam finally dominate the planet. Christianity is already in decline as a religious construct even as many still identify as Christian. Many people today undervalue the step forward that the American founders contributed in this area. In the 18th century, religion and government were still closely linked in most of the world. Establishing a government that allows the practice of most any religion without establishing any as state-sponsored was a tremendous advance.
With freedom of and from religion in the West, many individuals identify as Christian, but give their version of Christianity a type of lip service. Their traditional family religion now ranks low in their list of priorities. In the Islamic world, religion and government are still very much attached and people have remained loyal due to lack of choice. This is unlikely to change until there is natural disruption in those countries.
The next evolution of religion appears to me to likely be more linked to political idealogical constructs than to deities. For example, the current Marxist revival in the United States behaves much like a religion. It requires acceptance of certain constructs without debate, it requires one to be converted (“woke”), it is intolerant of critical analysis or dissent, and it identifies those who fail to convert as enemies. I hope that Americans will examine the tenants of these constructs with the same critical eye that has lead many of them away from the traditional religions.