A 2 part article on Religion, formation of it’s conception in early days, it’s journey through time and it’s present metaphor

Part – 1

(To be concluded in 2 parts)

Origins and development of religion

Through the ages, religion has acted as a powerful instrument to make a mutually unknown and unrelated group of people act together in a cohesive manner towards a common objective [8]. It has served to bring order in the conduct among a chaotic group of individuals. Temples acted as educational institutions and as centres for cultural gatherings and rituals which helped people bond together. Religious scriptures were written by learned scholars to describe ideal ethics, virtues, morals, and to spread the message of brotherhood. In other words, it has acted as a glue to hold the society together.

Furthermore, a few religious rituals and superstitions have guided people to navigate through improperly understood situations, enabling them to learn from the experiences of the entire community through concise and easily memorisable pointers and tales. For example, not venturing out during solar eclipses to protect eyes, not proceeding if a black cat crosses the path to safeguard against potentially dangerous predators at night, storing grains in the southwest parts of a dwelling to maximize the amount of sunlight they receive to keep them dry, etc. Religion also instilled in people a feeling of belongingness to a community. It acted as tool to unite people of a particular race or ethnicity in order to defend themselves from invaders or to further their aims of conquest. It has been a powerful instrument to inspire people to make great sacrifices towards a particular cause at the expense of personal interests, which might have been necessary to ensure the survival of their tribe or community. It was also used by rulers and kings to convince a large group of people that their rule is justified, thereby politically unifying them and organizing a society for efficient administration.

However in the present age, it is often misused to create a division in the society. As multiple religions and castes come to live together, polarizing people on communal grounds promotes hatred, intolerance, riots, and leads to the ultimate disintegration of the society. This effect is understood too well by political leaders who often instigate people for their own electoral motives. In fact, it is sometimes misused by spiritual leaders themselves to spread fear among people and in some cases, to brainwash them in order to garner profits, satisfy their ego, maintain their position of reverence, or to mask their own misdeeds [15]. It is often misinterpreted and misrepresented to the extent that it becomes against the very philosophy and idea of religion itself. The power of religion is called upon to unite a section of people and pit them against the others, often leading to their own detriment.

The more advances we make with science and technology, the less we need to rely on ancient scriptures to learn about the world. For instance, in modern times, we do not have to search the religious texts in order to learn about possible theories of the origins the universe, principles of architecture, etc. It is also argued that advancements in social sciences have led to an increase in values such as justice and equality without the need to turn to religion to provide moral guidelines. The establishment of formal legal and educational systems also relieves religious institutions of such responsibilities. Moreover, with increasing populations, advancements in communication technology, and the advent of the concept of nations, the requirement for additional agents of societal unification is diminishing. All this leads one to ponder about the relevance of religion in modern times.

Religion vs. theism

Modern treatment of religion is often erroneously considered synonymous with the belief in God(s). The confusion may arise due to a particularly Western interpretation of religion, however a broader global perspective is considered here. In fact, many ancient religions did not have belief baked into them[14]. These two concepts are separate and not mutually inclusive as people can be religious while being atheistic (like Buddhism, Jainism, Hinduism etc. do not mandate belief), and can also partake in religious festivities and ceremonies irrespective of belief. Similarly, an individual can believe in a higher being without subscribing to any religion. This distinction must be made before discussing the topic further, as all benefits and concerns raised above arise from following a religion, and not necessarily from a belief in God per se. Moreover, the concept of God is wide ranging and not well defined, and varies greatly among places, cultures, and even individuals.

Religion, like poetry, is not a mere idea, it is expression- Rabindranath Tagore

Does Science Obviate Religion ?

In recent times, many eminent scientists have begun to vehemently oppose the idea of being religious and work towards promoting an atheistic lifestyle. They argue that as scientific advancements reveal more and more about the natural world (and indeed the universe), the need for ascribing unexplained phenomena to the work of a divine being is reduced. This argument has a lot of merit, as scientific advancements can help us better understand the world around us and therefore enable us to lead better lives.

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him.- Friedrich Nietzsche

This viewpoint is also supported by positive correlations between low rates of religiosity and social wellness factors like life expectancy, low infant mortality rates etc. in developed countries[1]. But we can argue that as people become more affluent, they tend to become more content with their lives and hence less religious as they have fewer unfulfilled needs for which they seek a divine intervention. Religion does not necessarily help in improving the standard of living; it helps in coping up with a lower living standard[18]. Therefore it becomes unclear if lower levels of religiousness causes social improvements or if a society becomes prosperous first and consequently gives up piety because of their level of satisfaction.

Furthermore, science and technology can only provide humanity with a better understanding of nature and better methods of managing the society and its resources. However they are based on dispassionate grounds and cannot decide from within themselves, how they should be utilized and what direction they should be taking. For instance, scientific principles alone cannot decide whether resources should be spent on developing nuclear weapons or for funding cancer treatment. In absolute terms, there is no concrete correct answer to such philosophical questions, and these sciences must turn to something else for financial and moral guidance.

These external influences can be even more deeply entrenched for the social sciences. These sciences help in formulating egalitarian policies like abolition of slavery, right to education etc., but use certain basic axioms such as the existence of human rights and the importance and dignity of human life. The notion that such basic ethical and moral considerations are intuitive to us may not be accurate. Such rationality might be subjective and a product of our culture. In the past, racism and subjugation of colonized people was justified using scientific research and implemented by social scientists with a clean conscience[7]. Indeed societies in the past had formulated laws that would seem appalling today (like an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth in Hammurabi’s code). Till the present day, there is significant debate about things like animal rights, autonomy and rights of tribal people, taxation and distribution of wealth, etc. If humanitarian considerations are treated as ‘facts’, then such an approach to formulate moral laws is not strictly ‘scientific’, and inherently borrows their premise from religious principles.

“All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree”- Albert Einstein

People on Auto-pilot ?

Scientific knowledge is often difficult to follow for a lay person, and at most times does not appear to have any direct benefit or applicability in the person’s life. Religious sermons on the other hand tend to provide information in a more digestible form for the masses and follow the pattern of providing actionable advice. For instance which one would an ordinary person connect to more- evidence of evolution of humans from apes, or a presentation on the consequences of marrying out of caste? Even though the former is much more meaningful and profound information, it is unlikely to come out as impressive or even worth listening to for most people, particularly the less educated ones. A large majority of the people are neither too intelligent nor too scientifically inclined to appreciate the idea that social and moral welfare can be achieved by following scientific methods alone. As a result, such ideas are treated as esoteric and ignored by the general public, and are relegated to intellectual or academic circles.

Even among people capable of appreciating arguments for social improvements based on logic, understanding and thinking about them is inherently a tiring exercise[2]; and most people might not bother to put in any mental effort, especially if the topic is outside their area of expertise or interest. Preference for easy answers, for instructions to follow rather than alternatives to explore- often results in a follower mentality; and even scientists and scholars are not immune to this. For example, problems relating to the environment and climate change are well understood by most scientists, yet a majority of them do not make a lot of efforts to spread awareness about it (unless that is directly a part of their job), or even make lifestyle changes at a personal level to contribute towards combating the problem. However, the very same scientists would likely do much more for the environment (subconsciously) if such practices are integrated with their culture. For instance, if simple things such as giving up plastic and reducing electricity consumption become culturally preferred norms, they are much more likely to be followed when compared to being just logically sound (albeit inconvenient) advice, as is the case today. A case in point is the universally unhygienic and ugly practice of littering, which is rampant in many places but virtually non-existent in others where there is a culture of cleanliness. To further demonstrate the efficacy of movements based on the community and society, we can consider examples of the Chipko Andolan and Fridays for future movement, which have had massive impacts on the society, but had little involvement from the scientific community.

Moreover, the common public is influenced more by passions and emotions than by cold reason[2]. For instance, one can often see crowds at rock concerts or sports events dance and scream arbitrarily, whereas each individual would behave in a civil manner outside such a situation. Therefore, a single provocative statement made by any politician or religious leader is often more effective to stir a large group of people to perform a malicious task than dozens of logical lectures cautioning against the same. Such rhetoric typically arouses fear or anger among people and they tend not to analytically evaluate the situation and act impulsively against a perceived threat or injustice. Even non-extremists tend to follow suit for social acceptance or due to herd mentality, since if many others perform a particular action, it feels automatically correct or justified. The passion and emotion aroused by religion is also demonstrated by the large donations received by religious organizations from the public in comparison to scientific institutions[16], even though the work done by the latter can have a much deeper influence on the future of the world.

“The opposite of courage in our society is not cowardice, it is conformity”- Rollo May (can remove)

Even if advancements in science/social science provide us with new insights on better living, they tend to enter the life of the commoners by means of rituals and tenets such as Commandments of Christianity, teachings of Buddha, ideals of Democracy, advertisements (like pro-vaccinations and anti-smoking ads) etc. These dogmas then get precedence over the spirit behind their creation, start getting followed rigidly, and are not easily replaced even if our understanding develops further. The rigid Hindu caste system, and nations supporting insurgents to fight communism [9] are cases in point.

Don’t make this a religion-Buddha

Benefits of religion

Religion can persuade people to perform actions with no apparent benefit. These actions often take the form of rituals or superstitions. This in essence stems from the benefits that ancient societies derived from devising this concept- uniting people for the cause of their community, which was beyond any individual’s personal gain. In the modern world there might be many tasks that need to be done whose benefit may not be reaped in one’s own lifetime. For instance, actions related to climate protection often means imposing inconvenient restrictions on ourselves such as reducing the use of non-renewable resources, reducing and recycling waste, planting trees, etc. Actions in these areas today are not well rewarded under any form of government or socio-economic order and therefore are often lacking, and religion can be an effective method to accomplish these.

Religion can also help in channelizing the people’s angst into a focussed positive movement that could lead to their social upliftment. This is demonstrated by the Uttarakhand movement, where common people, including students and women, took part in protests and strikes to demand for the creation of a new state[17], resulting in greater autonomy and self-determination for the locals. There would still be many downtrodden communities in India whose voices are not heard because they are fewer in number. The movement is not strictly religious in nature, but shows the power in the unity of the masses, which can be achieved effectively through religion.

There are many non-tangible benefits of religion as well. People often turn towards religion (particularly theistic) for moral and spiritual upliftment. Consider an anxious student preparing for some exams. The mere act of praying may boost his confidence and help him calm down, and therefore may allow him to prepare better and increase the likelihood of performing well.  So an objectively immaterial act of belief could aid the relevant process of hard work thereby assisting in improving results. This is akin to a placebo effect in medicine, perhaps even more potent because such tasks require active efforts from the subject. Additionally, success for most people is not just a function of talent and hard work; luck also has a role to play in it[4]. For many people, religion and devotion represent attempts to influence their fortune. However irrational it may seem to the people themselves, they might be tempted to try it when they have no better rational method to improve their chances, thereby gaining a sense of satisfaction. Moreover religion can help socially disconnected people find meaning and purpose in their lives[3] and prevent them from plunging into depression or an existential crisis. Although there are plenty of rational and medical alternatives for mental health issues, religion remains a popular and easily accessible source to achieve this.

Prayer does not change God but it changes him who prays- Soren Kierkegaard

Criticisms Against Religion

Notwithstanding the benefits, religion appears to be at the core of the worst atrocities committed in human history. From the distant to the recent past, history is replete with examples such as the crusades and Nazism where religion has led to a tremendous loss of human lives. However, we must remind ourselves that an equally large number of monstrosities have been committed for non-religious reasons such as preparation for War (Bengal famines of 1943), fight against communism (Vietnam-US war, Iraq invasion), slave trade etc. The underlying cause of these tragedies appears to be human greed, and ideologies such as religion, race, caste, or democracy are merely used as guises to justify the perpetrator’s actions. They are used as instruments through which a vast majority can be coaxed to behave indifferently or maliciously towards other fellow humans. We could argue that these ideologies can by themselves be termed a form of religion[5], however it is impossible then to get rid of all ideologies of division from human minds.

Another criticism levelled against religion is that religious ideas are implanted within the mind of a person from their childhood, and therefore are a function of the society in which one was born. It is not something freely chosen by an individual but the ideology would influence their life for a long time. However the same is also true for one’s native language, food preferences, social and economic status, etc., and most of these factors also significantly affect one’s life. Rather than attempting to remove them, these differences tend to be nurtured in order to preserve diversity. The religious biases that one harbours are a part of the culture to which one belongs, and getting rid of religion does not free an individual from these cultural biases. Indeed religious practices tend to mingle with the language, dressing and food habits, construction methods, relations to various objects and possessions and the environment, the history and geography of a place, etc. and form an inseparable part of a culture.

Furthermore, we may consider the concept of God as delusional, and theistic religions can reinforce the notion and lead a large number of people to stay in the delusion. However there are many imaginary or delusional concepts that we base our society on, which serve to simplify our day to day lives, but can simultaneously be toxic. For example, the concept of nations is human made, but is responsible for many a disputes and non-cooperations having far reaching consequences. Fiat money is also a delusional concept, which only has value because of the trust people have in the government, and people possessing it may not necessarily have any useful thing to offer. However for reasonably well off people, money is “a proxy for points on a scale of self-regard and achievement”[2]. This trend can be very dangerous as it promotes amassing of wealth by depriving those who need it most, aggravating social inequalities. On the other hand, even a misapprehended belief in God(s) can have positive implications on ethics, social relationships, and mental health.

It has also been observed that deep rooted religious beliefs sometimes hinder emancipatory politics, where religious but disadvantaged groups themselves favour policies that prolong their oppression in topics that are at odds with religious teachings[18] (e.g. abortion). However this is not a deterrent for most socially relevant issues[18]. Indeed in other places, disadvantaged groups have been able to create a movement with active political participation that works for their upliftment. A case in point  is the Dalit movement in India, where people marginalized on the basis of caste (a product of religion itself) united as a community (relying on the emotional mobilization aspect of religion) to fight for equality[19].

Religion is the opium of the masses- Karl Marx

We can also argue that a religious mindset may impede scientific progress. A person convinced with the idea that religion already answers all questions that are subjected to scientific pursuit may be dissuaded from taking an interest in science. However in modern times, scientific and technological careers tend to be a lot more lucrative than others[6] and this in itself could provide enough motivation to people to pursue them. Moreover, there are much bigger and more concerning deterrents to scientific progress such as poverty, lack of quality education, and misgovernance and misallocation of funds.

Part 2