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

[Crono]

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.

What I am saying is that any experiment whether intellectual or in the realm and scale of nations that attempts to eliminate religion would result in a religious state, whether it is theistic or not. You might be right in calling them theocracies, but regardless a state entirely without religion cannot exist. History confirms this.

Civilization cannot exist without religion. The form and religion may change, but human nature does not.

 

[Childs]

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.

I tend to think the origins of religion is simply death. People don't want it to happen, and if someone can explain it in a way that makes them comfortable they will continue to believe. Self preservation is wired into our DNA, and this is a way to deal with that which we try to spend our lives avoiding. Oh well who knows...I'll put my money on science to give me eternal life, but it seems when it comes to death the house always wins.

 

[SKORPI0]

I think religion was "invented" to explain a lingering question on why we exist and also the presence of a higher creator we call god. Maybe even what happens to us (or our souls) when we die, thus having a messiah to save us from our "sins". For all we know we could be a just one of millions of planets seeded with life by a more advanced and older civilization, who to us are the gods. Then once in a while we are visited to see how we are doing. ^_^

Would civilization be more advanced if Galileo wasn't prosecuted by the Catholic Church to recant his findings? Looks like scientific findings where discourage/suppressed during those times. Probably in a lesser extent after that period. Overall not a big impact on what we call "progress".

Here's other websites with a similar discussion..

Has Religion Slowed Scientific Progress Through History?

If there was no religion, would science and technology have advanced more rapidly?

 

[sandorski]

What I am saying is that any experiment whether intellectual or in the realm and scale of nations that attempts to eliminate religion would result in a religious state, whether it is theistic or not. You might be right in calling them theocracies, but regardless a state entirely without religion cannot exist. History confirms this.

Civilization cannot exist without religion. The form and religion may change, but human nature does not.

I disagree. You can't replace it with what is essentially Religion by other means, but Civilization doesn't require Religion. Much of Europe has pretty much abandoned Religion at this point. The difference between it and North Korea or the USSR is that it has been done voluntarily and not by force.

What Civilization absolutely requires is central Government and a system of Laws that the citizenry respect and support.

 

[brianmanahan]

LOL nice Civ 4 reference.

or civ 2, if you are more than 12 years old

 

[Crono]

I disagree. You can't replace it with what is essentially Religion by other means, but Civilization doesn't require Religion. Much of Europe has pretty much abandoned Religion at this point. The difference between it and North Korea or the USSR is that it has been done voluntarily and not by force.

Pretty much? They aren't even close. Not yet. True, Christianity has seen a decline in Western Europe, but aside from the religious historical background of the European nations the most you can say about Europe is that it is progressing toward agnosticism or atheism. When the religious are a small minority of Europe - and the younger generations are showing statistically this will be the case in the future - we will see what happens.

 

[brianmanahan]

basically without religion, you would have "book of eli"

 

[glenn1]

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

It becomes bad enough that even noted atheist Christopher Hitchens calls it a nation of racist dwarves.

 

[sandorski]

It becomes bad enough that even noted atheist Christopher Hitchens calls it a nation of racist dwarves.

Hitchens also called it a Theocracy.

 

[cubby1223]

As with most of the important questions in life, look to South Park for the best answer.

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

Religions were never invented?

Silly mortal. Without religion birth control & abortions would be so much more commonplace that chances are you would never exist in.

You must then ask yourself, what is better? A civilization has accepted your existence? Or a more advanced civilization that did not permit you to exist?

 

[OverVolt]

Still zero, religion has been around for a long time for a reason.

 

[Ancalagon44]

Unfortunately, early Man himself would not have been advanced to understand that the Sun was really just a gigantic ball of gases floating in space 8 light minutes from him, producing massive amounts of energy through fusion. He would have understood "God did it" instantly though.

A better question is, how much more do we need to advance before we abandon all religion for the betterment of mankind? One can only hope it happens soon.

 

[Fritzo]

OK, new topic:

How much further would our technology be if we would have went with Tesla instead of Edison.

 

[Childs]

OK, new topic:

How much further would our technology be if we would have went with Tesla instead of Edison.

We need a new thread for this one.

 

[Jadow]

but the monks did teach people how to read and write.

The monks also wrote the history and kept the greek philosphers writings from being lost.

 

[SirStev0]

We'd be in space.
Though economists and politicians wouldn't be helping either.

 

[crownjules]

I tend to think the origins of religion is simply death. People don't want it to happen, and if someone can explain it in a way that makes them comfortable they will continue to believe. Self preservation is wired into our DNA, and this is a way to deal with that which we try to spend our lives avoiding. Oh well who knows...I'll put my money on science to give me eternal life, but it seems when it comes to death the house always wins.

Death is simply one part of a much broader reasoning: explain the unknown. Look at all the religions that have gods that control the weather, seasons, natural events, etc. That was how the human mind coped with not knowing the scientific reasons for why volcanoes erupted, the earth shook, the wet and dry seasons, life and death, and so on. They made up stuff to make it easier to deal with in their minds.

 

[zinfamous]

Not far at all.

Contemporary Scientific thought derives from philosophy which derives from religion.

Religion is fine; it's the determination of a vocal minority in the world to keep it as the "one truth" that kills humanity.

 

[Braznor]

OP, religion impacts your own life whether you, yourselves believe it or not.

Think of this.

Over the thousands of years of human societal evolution, only human possessing the psychological traits who have the capability to compute in terms of a concepts like religion survived, The ones who could not or did not did not live or survive.

Whether you like it or not, religion sculpted the psychological base of the modern human being.

 

[sandorski]

Not far at all.

Contemporary Scientific thought derives from philosophy which derives from religion.

Religion is fine; it's the determination of a vocal minority in the world to keep it as the "one truth" that kills humanity.

I disagree. Religion is a subset of Philosophy, not the other way around. The difference is that Religion, once philosophized, becomes assumed as True thus influencing Philosophical thought.

Philosophy is basically an attempt to understand Reality through a mixture of Knowledge and Imagination to answer questions that are beyond Scientific experimentation.

Science, OTOH, seeks to avoid Philosophy and Assumptions based upon Philosophical thought. The only Assumptions science makes is what has been shown to be true through repeated experimentation. Philosophy and/or Religion can influence the direction of what Science investigates, but Science doesn't let Philosophy/Religion determine Scientific thought if those Investigations prove to not adhere to the results of experimentation. This is why there has been so much friction between Science and Religion for centuries.

 

[Childs]

Death is simply one part of a much broader reasoning: explain the unknown. Look at all the religions that have gods that control the weather, seasons, natural events, etc. That was how the human mind coped with not knowing the scientific reasons for why volcanoes erupted, the earth shook, the wet and dry seasons, life and death, and so on. They made up stuff to make it easier to deal with in their minds.

No doubt. Once you have a god you can explain anything away because the true nature of the god is unknowable, or should be, and anything unknown is simply the gods will. Problem is when you get people saying they know the gods will. But I chose to highlight death because that more than likely that was the original reason. Before irrigation and farming, when people were purely scavengers, there was death. And there probably was a shaman steering the group one way or another because he claimed he had the ear of the gods.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

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.

1) The idea that military spread of ideas and technology is the only method is laughable. Case in point, the Silk Road.
2) Taking your example of Rome, in only two places were religious integration even needed - with the various peoples on the Germanic frontiers, and with Jews and Christians. In the case of Jews and Christians, the initial circumstances that led to strained tensions between the Romans and the 'natives' was religious in nature anyway. Without religion as a cause, there would have been no need for religion as a cure. And in the case of the Germanic tribes, the divide was more cultural than religious, which in any case was so great that most attempts to integrate Germans into the Empire was a long-term failure.
3) Please explain how without religion there would be no Greece.
4) Correlation does not equal causation. There are several other factors that you are not taking into account - development of language, development of agriculture and domestication, technological development, etc. In any case, I don't see any evidence to show that religion was a recent invention. And an invention is exactly what it is.

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.

Saying that a Roman leader held a priesthood is utterly worthless, since the positions were predominantly political in nature. As a proxy for actual belief, it is useless.

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.

Maybe that was a bad choice of words. Yes, they probably had nearly as many religious holidays as work days. But again, those were predominantly political in nature, and were created by ambitious aediles in the Republic or early Empire, when the aedileship still mattered, or by Emperors. I reiterate what I said before; I believe for many Romanized citizens, religion was purely a means to prosperity rather than an end. The Romans were very pragmatic people, I have no problem with the idea of them taking a Pascal's Wager type approach to their belief.

A small example that demonstrates this is the use of the civil service by Constantine and Constantius II to spread Christianity, and then by Julian to try spread paganism. Julian died before any of his policies really got going, but the actions of his cousin and uncle before him speaks volumes about the importance of belief in the Roman Empire.