How far do you think we would have advanced as a civilization if...

[Mr. Pedantic]

About 20% less.

What you may not realize is that religion played a VERY important factor in peacefully unifying groups of people into nations.

Where Rome conquered people with military might and crushed entire cultures, religion allowed people to peacefully find common ground and form a unification of cultures.

One of the reasons why we know so much about our history, is because monk scribes copied ancient text across the generations.

Monasteries were one of the very first types of public education.

Monasteries did not teach a well rounded education as they only taught latin and scripture, but the monks did teach people how to read and write.

Many Roman historians were secular. But the whole point is moot anyway, because the question was not what would happen if religions suddenly disappeared at one point in human history. The question is what would have happened if religions had never been invented

 

[sixone]

Many Roman historians were secular. But the whole point is moot anyway, because the question was not what would happen if religions suddenly disappeared at one point in human history. The question is what would have happened if religions had never been invented

Historians may have been secular, but Roman society and Roman government were not.

 

[Baked]

Faith and Morale are very powerful motivators and religion is the fuel behind them.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

Historians may have been secular, but Roman society and Roman government were not.

How is this at all relevant to my previous post? The fact that many Roman historians were secular demonstrates that religion is not the sole motivation for producing or preserving historical records. What does this have to do with Roman society as a whole?

Also, as in your link, Roman religious practices were mostly founded upon pragmatic tendencies - if believing in one set of gods didn't work, then many Romans switched to another belief system. If anything, this shows that religion did not have much effect upon the Roman people, because it implies that Romans didn't actually believe in religious doctrine as an end, rather as a means. This suggests that in the absence of religion, Romans (if there would even be Romans) would simply have found another way to influence the world around them.

 

[Texashiker]

The question is what would have happened if religions had never been invented

We would be hundred of years behind where we are today, and I have already explained why.

But let me explain it again.

If you conquer a group of people with military might, there is always a certain level of resentment and civil unrest that finally leads to rebellion.

If a people willingly submit to a new idea, the risk of rebellion is very limited.

Where nations like Rome failed to defeat the people of Europe as a whole and unify them under a common language and government, religion was able to do just that.

If religion never happened, the different factions of Europe would have been waring for centuries after Rome fell. Without religion we may have never had a Greece, or a Rome.

There would have been no reason for the crusades to happen, so the exchange of cultures and ideas between the muslims and christians would have never happened.

Instead of math being brought to Europe by the returning crusaders, it would have taken centuries to slowly work its way into europe.

Reading and writing that was promoted by monasteries and monks would not have fallen to the wayside.

These examples are just from the middle ages. Without religion to unify people, would we have even made it to the middle ages?

Why was mankind on the planet for 100,000 years, then all of a sudden there was a growth on society in the past 6,000 years? What about the other 94,000 years? What happened for society not to develop?

Why did humanity all of a sudden develop over the past 4,000 - 8,000 years?

Why didn't we have cities and government 50,000 years ago?

What changed between 100,000 years ago, and 6,000 years ago?

The development of an organized religion. Religion is what brought mankind out of the stone age and flourished ideas.

 

[sandorski]

We would be hundred of years behind where we are today, and I have already explained why.

But let me explain it again.

If you conquer a group of people with military might, there is always a certain level of resentment and civil unrest that finally leads to rebellion.

If a people willingly submit to a new idea, the risk of rebellion is very limited.

Where nations like Rome failed to defeat the people of Europe as a whole and unify them under a common language and government, religion was able to do just that.

If religion never happened, the different factions of Europe would have been waring for centuries after Rome fell. Without religion we may have never had a Greece, or a Rome.

There would have been no reason for the crusades to happen, so the exchange of cultures and ideas between the muslims and christians would have never happened.

Instead of math being brought to Europe by the returning crusaders, it would have taken centuries to slowly work its way into europe.

Reading and writing that was promoted by monasteries and monks would not have fallen to the wayside.

These examples are just from the middle ages. Without religion to unify people, would we have even made it to the middle ages?

Why was mankind on the planet for 100,000 years, then all of a sudden there was a growth on society in the past 6,000 years? What about the other 94,000 years? What happened for society not to develop?

Why did humanity all of a sudden develop over the past 4,000 - 8,000 years?

Why didn't we have cities and government 50,000 years ago?

What changed between 100,000 years ago, and 6,000 years ago?

The development of an organized religion. Religion is what brought mankind out of the stone age and flourished ideas.

Disagree. It was Written Language that changed, not Religion.

 

[DrPizza]

The more interesting and accurate question would be how far could we have advanced if religion would have gotten out of the way when necessary.

Early religion was sort of necessary IMO to unify civilizations give them a stable base and by consequence allow more free time/energy to be devoted to science. A good example is the Golden Age of Islam when for 400-500 years (9th to 13th? century) the middle east flourished in Math and Science and then fell.

Basically during this period the Islamic empire was tolerant of other religions and valued scholars highly even if they were from a conquered country or Christians or Jews or whatever. People of various faiths were even given important politcal positions. Being a scholar came first. Also ,a common language and numerals spread via the Quran which aided in the exchange of ideas. So in a sense a lot of this period of advancement would have never happened without religion.

However, it all came to a crashing halt for a couple of internal and external reasons. Internally a decline in religious belief and a rise is skepticism was observed. So those in charge started shunning math and science as morally wrong and started only teaching theology in schools. Externally the Crusades were happening which decreased tolerance for other religions and destroyed trade routes where a lot of the exchange of ideas where happening. So here we see religions setting us back for hundreds of years.

So the real problem seems to be that when religion is challenged with scientific reason and skepticism it fights back (historically quite well) shutting down science and forbidding ideas that question its validity instead of adapting with the times.

That seems rather well thought out and along the lines I was also thinking. Religion has both moved us forward and moved us backward. It's hard to determine how far forward we ever would have moved without it.

I was thinking about fighting between groups/countries. How willing would people be to lay down their lives for their leaders if they didn't think there was another place to go to in the afterworld? I know not everyone who fights in the military believes this, but it does seem to be a motivating factor - or at least a factor that decreases a resistance for giving up your only time on this planet.

 

[sixone]

How is this at all relevant to my previous post? The fact that many Roman historians were secular demonstrates that religion is not the sole motivation for producing or preserving historical records. What does this have to do with Roman society as a whole?

Also, as in your link, Roman religious practices were mostly founded upon pragmatic tendencies - if believing in one set of gods didn't work, then many Romans switched to another belief system. If anything, this shows that religion did not have much effect upon the Roman people, because it implies that Romans didn't actually believe in religious doctrine as an end, rather as a means. This suggests that in the absence of religion, Romans (if there would even be Romans) would simply have found another way to influence the world around them.

Most of your Roman historians were also the elite who were holding priesthoods in the state religion. While religion wasn't the sole motivation, it certainly played its part.

And your claim that religion didn't have much effect on the Roman people is patently false. Their calendar was built around religions observances, and sacred places were located all over the place, usually water sources.

 

[Texashiker]

Disagree. It was Written Language that changed, not Religion.

Written language does not unify people who have differing morals and values.

Just because the Romans brought Latin to Gaul and Britannia, does not mean the people of those regions lived in peace with the Romans.

Also, did religion give birth to written language, or did written language give birth to religion?

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Disagree. It was Written Language that changed, not Religion.

Written language developed in places with religious beliefs and served as a method to make a record of those beliefs and pass them down. Now, whether religion actually gave birth to writing, we won't ever know, but the two weren't independent of each other.

It strikes me that many of the earliest religions could be seen as early attempts at science. People observed what was around them and came up with ideas for why the world would work in such a way, whether it was a coyote carrying the sun across the sky on his back or a great mother who was responsible for bringing the rain so crops could grow. Observational data coupled with existing knowledge to form a hypothesis? Hmmmm....

 

[sandorski]

Written language does not unify people who have differing morals and values.

Just because the Romans brought Latin to Gaul and Britannia, does not mean the people of those regions lived in peace with the Romans.

Also, did religion give birth to written language, or did written language give birth to religion?

1) What you claim as Religion changing things 6000 years ago was actually Written Language. We have no reliable record of what occurred before that, but clearly Religion existed prior to Writing.

2) Knowledge gave birth to Written Language.

 

[Texashiker]

It strikes me that many of the earliest religions could be seen as early attempts at science. People observed what was around them and came up with ideas for why the world would work in such a way, whether it was a coyote carrying the sun across the sky on his back or a great mother who was responsible for bringing the rain so crops could grow. Observational data coupled with existing knowledge to form a hypothesis? Hmmmm....

Interesting observation.

Different forms of religion developed to explain natural science. People needed a way to track the summers and winters so they knew when to plant the seeds.

Maybe our modern human civilization began when we moved from a hunter / gatherer, to a farmer / gardener.

Something happened around 6,000 or 8,000 years ago that made mankind stop roaming the countryside looking for food. What made mankind set down the seeds of civilization? We formed communities, we raised livestock and we planted gardens.

 

[Oyeve]

We would be a much stronger race even if all the plagues killed of most of us and we ate bad swine anyway. The survivers would have built a better stronger race.

 

[Maximilian]

It would not have advanced all. If religions were never invented, we would still be stuck in the Bronze age.
Without Mysticism, Polytheism, and Monotheism, there's not much you can do technology wise.

lol indeed.

 

[Texashiker]

1) What you claim as Religion changing things 6000 years ago was actually Written Language. We have no reliable record of what occurred before that, but clearly Religion existed prior to Writing.

2) Knowledge gave birth to Written Language.

You still have nothing to unify the people and bring peace to a region.

So what if two tribes have written language?

England and France were at war for hundreds of years, and they had written language. Before England and France developed into two separate nations, there was a time when people of both areas living in peace with each other.

Unless there is something to unify people, all we will have is waring factions fighting for power.

Once we have unification, then we form nations.

Once we form nations, we form governments.

 

[Sonikku]

Without religion we'd still be in the dark ages. Which really weren't dark at all when you consider it was an era where the working poor didn't oppress and wage class warfare on the job creators for once. Plus we'd still have freakin' sweet sword fights and stuff, as depicted by Hollywood so many times over. I actually saw Arn the Knight Templar the other day and he was going all badass with a sword in each hand, chomping down heretic bastards oldschool style in the name of god. What was dark about it exactly? It was awesome.

 

[sandorski]

You still have nothing to unify the people and bring peace to a region.

So what if two tribes have written language?

England and France were at war for hundreds of years, and they had written language. Before England and France developed into two separate nations, there was a time when people of both areas living in peace with each other.

Unless there is something to unify people, all we will have is waring factions fighting for power.

Once we have unification, then we form nations.

Once we form nations, we form governments.

I'm not saying that Written Language was the great unifier. What I am saying is that what you are calling the difference between 100k years ago and 6k years ago is incorrect. We absolutely know Religion was a prominent aspect of Life 6k years ago, because of Written Language telling us so. However, that does not mean Religion came about 6k years ago and caused Civilization to occur then.

I would suggest that Civilization existed long before 6k years ago. It certainly appears that Egyptian Civilization was already well established before the written record even began. At some point people living in a civilized society developed Writing.

 

[Texashiker]

However, that does not mean Religion came about 6k years ago and caused Civilization to occur then.

I would suggest that Civilization existed long before 6k years ago. It certainly appears that Egyptian Civilization was already well established before the written record even began. At some point people living in a civilized society developed Writing.

Agreed.

 

[Childs]

I've often considered the fact that if the Dark Ages didn't exist, we would be about 500 years more advanced than we are now. It was more a combination of Rome's stranglehold on outlying regions, the Visigoths, the Crusades, and disease that caused it rather than religion alone.

This is probably where I am at, although I concede that without religion at all many of the wonders on ancient civilization would not have been. You don't really learn astronomy to the degree that the ancients did if they weren't searching for their origins. You don't build pyramids unless you want to get closer to the gods. In many ways science improved to worship on a grand scale.

But just removing the Dark Ages, 500 years seems about right.

 

[Crono]

Religion isn't an invention. It's like asking what civilization would be like without art. It exists regardless of whether you want it to or not, unless you happen to live in another universe.

If you don't believe me, look at what happens to any nation that outlaws religion (notably communist and oppressive states in the 20th century).

 

[sandorski]

Religion isn't an invention. It's like asking what civilization would be like without art. It exists regardless of whether you want it to or not, unless you happen to live in another universe.

If you don't believe me, look at what happens to any nation that outlaws religion (notably communist and oppressive states in the 20th century).

Ok, so what happens to a nation that outlaws religion?

 

[Childs]

Religion isn't an invention. It's like asking what civilization would be like without art. It exists regardless of whether you want it to or not, unless you happen to live in another universe.

If you don't believe me, look at what happens to any nation that outlaws religion (notably communist and oppressive states in the 20th century).

You can claim gods exists without man, but religion is invented. Its invented by the gods when they told the first people to worship them. Or it was invented when some guy needed a way to get people to do what they say. But at one point someone or some thing said you need to worship something. Unless you are claiming its written in human DNA.

 

[Crono]

Ok, so what happens to a nation that outlaws religion?

You have political/socioeconomic philosophy enter as a replacement, becoming (effectively) the state religion, and the dictatorship or oligarchy turns brutal persecution of those who practice religion underground (which is inevitable), as well as broader oppression of the masses. Dissenters of any kind are quickly taken care of by secret police.

The best modern example of this is North Korea, but the first large one was of course the Soviet Union.

The same thing is possible/likely in a theocracy, but that's the other extreme.

 

[Crono]

You can claim gods exists without man, but religion is invented. Its invented by the gods when they told the first people to worship them. Or it was invented when some guy needed a way to get people to do what they say. But at one point someone or some thing said you need to worship something. Unless you are claiming its written in human DNA.

The desire to worship and be worshiped is part of human nature. Not every person expresses the desire to be worshiped, but look at human history and you will see monarchs and autocrats since the earliest civilizations (like Egypt) set themselves up as gods.

Religions are created, but religion can't be traced back to a single event or place. It is as old as humanity. I would argue that it isn't even possible for a civilization to arise apart from religion. There isn't a single example of one. Which is why - apart from hypothetical consideration - there isn't really an answer to the OP's question. Religion is a part of civilization. Any attempt to root it out completely would result in a totalitarian regime imposing a world view that would inevitably evolve into a religion.

 

[sandorski]

You have political/socioeconomic philosophy enter as a replacement, becoming (effectively) the state religion, and the dictatorship or oligarchy turns brutal persecution of those who practice religion underground (which is inevitable), as well as broader oppression of the masses. Dissenters of any kind are quickly taken care of by secret police.

The best modern example of this is North Korea, but the first large one was of course the Soviet Union.

The same thing is possible/likely in a theocracy, but that's the other extreme.

Basically a Theist Religion is replaced by a non-Theist Religion. Agreed that is what happens in North Korea and to a lesser extent the USSR. In a way these are still Theocracies.