Homo Secularis (1 Viewer)

[Consigliere]

It is late, the Saints are losing, I am on my second Scotch, so here is a thread on what would the world be like if we had no notion of religion.

First, I don’t think you can go very far, without addressing, how does this come about?
(A) Humans do not evolve to the point of wondering about the higher things. Homo Habilis goes straight from twigs and stones to pocket calculators. In this case we are monkeys with guns and cars.
(B) Humans evolve past it quickly. (Tribes that wait on the rain man to water the crops die). We’d be like the proto-molecule in The Expanse by now.
(C) Humans evolve per normal but we eventually learn better. (The ”nones” are at 30% and gaining steadily, so why not?) This may be where we are headed.
(D) Normal evolution, but through some quirk, it just never occurs to us. (The sun is some fire up there in the sky, what else could it be?). There is no fear of death so there is not people taking advantage of that fear.

Paths (C) and (D) seem most interesting.

Path (C) is future tense. There are still wars because of leaders like Putin. There is still corruption because of leaders like Bolsonaro. The Middle East is still a mess. But it seems like the good guys will have more power due to better education, unimpeded science, more unity, more efficient charity, and less political pandering.

Path (D) is the most interesting. Flood stories are just about plain rain. Greek culture happens. The Roman Empire would happen. Fewer cathedrals, so the money is spent on bridges and roads. Colonialism was always about getting products and slaves, so it still happens. The main thing is that science moves faster. Galileo can publish. Darwin is embraced. It’s like Sid Meyer Civilization with double-plus tech bonus. We would be like Star Trek by now. I am on my third Scotch now.

 

[Booker]

It is late, the Saints are losing, I am on my second Scotch, so here is a thread on what would the world be like if we had no notion of religion.

First, I don’t think you can go very far, without addressing, how does this come about?
(A) Humans do not evolve to the point of wondering about the higher things. Homo Habilis goes straight from twigs and stones to pocket calculators. In this case we are monkeys with guns and cars.
(B) Humans evolve past it quickly. (Tribes that wait on the rain man to water the crops die). We’d be like the proto-molecule in The Expanse by now.
(C) Humans evolve per normal but we eventually learn better. (The ”nones” are at 30% and gaining steadily, so why not?) This may be where we are headed.
(D) Normal evolution, but through some quirk, it just never occurs to us. (The sun is some fire up there in the sky, what else could it be?). There is no fear of death so there is not people taking advantage of that fear.

Paths (C) and (D) seem most interesting.

Path (C) is future tense. There are still wars because of leaders like Putin. There is still corruption because of leaders like Bolsonaro. The Middle East is still a mess. But it seems like the good guys will have more power due to better education, unimpeded science, more unity, and less political pandering.

Path (D) is the most interesting. Flood stories are just about plain rain. Greek culture happens. The Roman Empire would happen. Fewer cathedrals, so the money is spent on bridges and roads. Colonialism was always about getting products and slaves, so it still happens. The main thing is that science moves faster. Galileo can publish. Darwin is embraced. It’s like Sid Meyer Civilization with double-plus tech bonus. We would be like Star Trek by now. I am on my third Scotch by now.

I think the catch is the fear of death. I think that's an ingrained, evolutionary self defense mechanism. One would think a population with no fear of death would have more reckless behavior, likely leading to a much higher death rate, reducing the chances for the species to propagate and thrive. And without that inner sense of self-preservation, would we simply become army ants marching in unison, and therefore lose the urge to innovate?

At the same time, I think that ingrained fear of death also is a factor in the development of god-belief/religion, in that believing in a god/afterlife scheme is basically a mind game one plays with oneself to resolve the conflict brought about by that inner sense of self-presevation being at odds with the knowledge that death is ultimately inescapable.

And I love Civilization. I played a shirt ton of Civ 2 back in the 90's, and then got Civilization Revolution for the PS3 years ago that I still play. There's always the dilemma -- do I build libraries first, to help my science development, or do I build temples to make the people happy? Or do I just resist building any temples or cathedrals on principle to create a rational, enlightened civilization? Or, do I go all in and eventually form a Fundamentalist governement to control the masses? Decisions, decisions...

 

[Consigliere]

One would think a population with no fear of death would have more reckless behavior, likely leading to a much higher death rate, reducing the chances for the species to propagate and thrive.

That would be one heck of a Great Filter. If a species makes it through, they will be hard to stop.

And I love Civilization. I played a shirt ton of Civ 2 back in the 90's, and then got Civilization Revolution for the PS3 years ago that I still play. There's always the dilemma -- do I build libraries first, to help my science development, or do I build temples to make the people happy? Or do I just resist building any temples or cathedrals on principle to create a rational, enlightened civilization? Or, do I go all in and eventually form a Fundamentalist governement to control the masses? Decisions, decisions...

All your libraries and temples were so pretty before the Mongols showed up with two chariots…

 

[SystemShock]

That's an interesting question. I don't know that "homo secularis" would be possible from an evolutionary standpoint, but what would be of humankind if religions were not imposed by rulers and conquerors? Would there be Christianity if the Roman empire didn't make it its official religion? Would the M.E. be at the vanguard of science and humanism if Islam doesn't practically make science and arts sins?

 

[bird]

Paraphrased from Parke Godwin’s “Waiting for the Galactic Bus” (or his ”Snake Oil Wars” I can’t remember which): this is what happens when you have a brain capable of conceiving the infinite in a finite body.

 

[bird]

That's an interesting question. I don't know that "homo secularis" would be possible from an evolutionary standpoint, but what would be of humankind if religions were not imposed by rulers and conquerors? Would there be Christianity if the Roman empire didn't make it its official religion? Would the M.E. be at the vanguard of science and humanism if Islam doesn't practically make science and arts sins?

Just a small comment…Islam invented Algebra, they pushed science and poetry. That being said like the conservative elements of Judaism and Christianity the conservatives of Islam did and have sought to control science by use of deity.

 

[SystemShock]

Just a small comment…Islam invented Algebra, they pushed science and poetry. That being said like the conservative elements of Judaism and Christianity the conservatives of Islam did and have sought to control science by use of deity.

That's the point: before Islam became the law of the land, the Middle East (or more accurately Mesopotamia) was what the cradle of civilization, at the vanguard of science and the arts, and I wonder, what would've happened in the M.E. had this push for science and the arts would've continued?

 

[Consigliere]

That's the point: before Islam became the law of the land, the Middle East (or more accurately Mesopotamia) was what the cradle of civilization, at the vanguard of science and the arts, and I wonder, what would've happened in the M.E. had this push for science and the arts would've continued?

But it remained so. Islam took over in the 600s and Islamic lands (Spain through Mesopotamia) remained the vanguard of scientific/medical/mathematical progress until about 1500. Not sure about causation but maybe the Protestant Reformation allowed Europe to take over due to rift in Christianity.

 

[bird]

Imo, the main problem with Islam is not the immediate schism between Shi’a and Sunni after the death of the Prophet but the “closing” of Ijtihad which was the process of interpreting the Q’uran. That was done by basically one, iirc, Imam.