Is Religion Going Extinct?

[Interbane]

Here is an interesting article about religion going extinct in certain countries.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80bea ... countries/

Which leads one to wonder about the ramifications, which Massimo Pigliucci talks about here:

http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/ ... dhist.html

What do you guys think about different social groups taking the place of religion? Also, what do you think about Humanism or some other set of global ethics taking the place of the ten commandments/religious morality?

[Robert Tulip]

Religion will not go extinct. It will adapt. As supernatural faith is increasingly regarded as ridiculous, new forms of religion will evolve that are compatible with science. There is nothing about religion per se that is incompatible with science, in that both seek to validate human life by knowledge of an ultimate truth. There is only one truth, so false religion will gradually die out to be replaced by true religion.

The clash between science and religion is the result of the conservative nature of faith, its desire to hold on to ancient teachings. So far, religion has had the social power to ignore evidence. This is no longer the case, because modern people regard willful ignorance with contempt and mockery. As false ancient teachings are progressively shown to be wrong, new interpretations will arise that find the real truth concealed within the false veneer.

[TaylorBP]

Religion as we know it now may become less and less prevelant, but it will never go completely extinct. Even now, those who are religious, and are "willfully ignorant" of scientific advances and modern society's view on a supernatural faith, see how the world is turning a deaf ear to their concerns for humanity. They are very much aware of how the world views them, and that it isn't always a postive view. However, that will not stop them from practicing and believing in their religion. They would have scientific proof of their beliefs to offer up, just as someone who has no traditional religion would.

[DWill]

While there is some evidence of adaptation--for example, liberal or non-literalist Christians--in my view this all points to religion losing its hold. Adaptation to the findings of science means, inevitably, that religion becomes weaker and weaker. There is really no point to religion if it just mirrors materialist reality. Religion always must posit some ultimate, beyond the scope of materialism. If it doesn't, what is there in it that takes effort to believe in? That effort to believe is what religion is all about, and that's what materialism frees us from (or enslaves us to, if you want to take the opposite stance). The most you could create under a scientific understanding is a deliberate ethos or ethic, which might mimic the orienting worldview of a religion.

So far, to the extent that religion has aligned itself with science, it has simply decided to avoid confrontation, choosing to think that natural selection can be part of God's plan and reading Genesis as figurative. But this is a weakening, not a strengthening, of the social niche of religion. Take away all the scientifically unverifiable elements, and you have no religion at all.

[TaylorBP]

But isn't the scientific proof and talk of adaptation that Christians have to convince the world of their validity? Truely believing Christians, not those who are in the church due to peer pressure or for the sake of maintaining a facade, will believe regardless of whether or not there's any real proof of what they believe. That's the whole point of Christianity, to take all of this crazy sounding testimony to be true, solely based on faith in God and what the Bible has said He's done and others have done through Him. Religion may lose its hold on the world, but there will remain a handful of people that believe in God and His omnipotentence and all it entails. And they won't care how much people ridicule them for believing as they do. So, traditional religion will never go extinct it'll always be around, even if only in small, concentrated amounts.

[DWill]

Yes, extinction is too strong a word. The point should be that if religion diminishes by 90%, the world will be far different than it is today. We can't expect it not to exist at all. Of course, there is no immediate prospect of this happening. The study johnson cited involved nine countries with surely no more than a few percent of the world's population. Look at the Muslim countries, Christian Africa, Latin America, Europe (Muslim growth), as well as the U.S. Religion is getting stronger, overall, in these places. It isn't inconceivable that religion will come to dominate life as it doesn't today.

[lady of shallot]

Robert Tulip:

because modern people regard willful ignorance with contempt and mockery.

I would disagree with this statement. Modern people are religious in great part and many of them are highly intelligent and highly educated.

This is my desk top dictionary's definition of religion:

religion |riˈlijən|
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods : ideas about the relationship between science and religion.
• details of belief as taught or discussed : when the school first opened they taught only religion, Italian, and mathematics.
• a particular system of faith and worship : the world's great religions.
• a pursuit or interest to which someone ascribes supreme importance : consumerism is the new religion.


So how religion could remain, absent a supreme being, is difficult for me to understand. What would be the point of it? Who would want to subscribe to it? It would seem that only those who could be ensnared in some one else's new dream of religion would be the willfully ignorant that Robert Tulip says modern people regard with contempt and mockery.

The big question, in my opinion, that never seems to be addressed, is the psychology of religion. Why is some kind of spirituality so important to some of us and totally absent as a need in others?

[Azrael]

Not fast enough! Without religion and government the world would be a better place.

[Robert Tulip]

Not fast enough! Without religion and government the world would be a better place.

Hey Starburst, what about suggesting getting rid of people while you are at it?

You have a point that religion and government are intimately entwined. But without government the planet would collapse into anarchy and war. Not good.

[Azrael]

Not fast enough! Without religion and government the world would be a better place.

Hey Starburst, what about suggesting getting rid of people while you are at it?

You have a point that religion and government are intimately entwined. But without government the planet would collapse into anarchy and war. Not good.

So. Maybe then we would find out if this almighty deity exist for real. Surely he would step in and safe us all. NOT!