Is religion the basis of civilization?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pascha
  • Start date Start date
P

Pascha

Guest
Pope Benedict XVI stated recently " Genuine religion ... stands at the base of any authentically human culture." He said. "It rejects all forms of violence and totalitarianism: not only on principles of faith but also of right reason."

So, is "genuine religion" something broader than belief in a particular a particular organized religion, and is it that which makes civilization possible?
 
I would have to disagree, it is a hinder, like the pandora box story, civilization, while seeming to promote kind relations, can do the opposite as well. From what I can gather, the increase in people will cause religion to become less important, this is predicted and I bet, that 9/11/01 was done by people who had ancient thought in mind when they try to destroy civilization. Do you not see the word "evil" lurking inside the word, civilization.
 
Religion is a behavioral control mechanism that reduces stress between members of the group by letting them--generally correctly--understand and predict other members' actions reliably. It also reduces intragroup conflict and supports the use of third-party or peer-generated punishment while reducing the value of retaliation.

Additionally, religion--unlike ethnic origins--allows for the comparatively rapid expansion of the group by assimulation while increasing group cohesion. The exportability of a religion as well as it's symbols allows for forcing value changes in decision making of group members that can overcome the costs and hazards of group selection.

This ability to allow functioning groups of larger numbers than one can individually deal with on a regular basis did create a pradigm shift that allowed for the creation of "civilization" and the increased eusociality of humans.

"Genuine" religion is probably some combination of a good story, a genetic propensity for "gullibility", a propensity for determining self value from those around you, a lack of intelligence or high levels of sociosexuality, and higher sensitivity of the brain's reward system to barely detectible patterns in the environment.
 
People are the basis of Civilization.

Religion is to make you feel guilty about it.
 
Terms do matter: What do you call civilization?

Civilization to me is a centralized community based in one fixed location with control over agriculture and commerce. Religion is the means to congeal people to a common task without making them "slaves".

Religion, a common acceptance of forces bigger than the collective will of the community that is recognized as controlling the weather, crops, fate.

The fowl or egg question is whether a religious belief precedes the gathering of individuals into a collective centralized society or does the gathering of the individuals yield religion as an outgrowth.

Regardless, wealth (excess quanities of tradable items (grain, rabbits, herd stock, people) is the sine qua non of the birth of civilization, for it takes wealth for people to have idle time to organize any society or group.
 
I think religion is the basis for civilization.

I am not a catholic and do not care what Herr Ratzinger has to say. He should address the problems the priests create.
 
No. I would argue that religion is a common component of most human societies. But the fact that religion has faded in importance in almost all modern nations suggests that it is only a transitional stage. As for rejecting violence, people are killing each other in the name of religion all over the world every day.
 
That sounds like the No True Scotsman fallacy. Ratzinger there is defining religion in a way that basically renders it nonexistent. There have been _no_ major religions that have never dabbled in violence, totalitarianism, or unreasonable behavior. We're human; we are violent, we do want people to do things our way, and we can be very unreasonable. I have no idea what he's talking about here, especially since this set of principles (don't hit, don't be a condescending jack@ss, be reasonable) is pretty common across religious and philosophical lines. Aristotle was telling people this stuff far before the Church was a twinkle in anyone's eyes, and Confucius would also like some credit here. Neither of those guys were particularly religious.

Religion as it is commonly known is a very good way to kickstart some of the hallmarks of what we consider "civilization". That is because it is a good way to control people's behavior. This can be as innocuous as an exhortation to love thy neighbor, or as, yes, totalitarian as coercing people to behave as you want them to by threatening them with eternal damnation and an Inquisition or two. If you want to get a large group of people to do something big, you have to convince them to do it, and religion is a very good way to do that. Doesn't take so long, either. This is not what the Pope's talking about, since this is coercive and possibly even totalitarian behavior, but it is the way that religion is often used throughout the world.
 
Religion is epiphenominal and has no role in the base of a society. The basis of a civilization comes down to 4 things: Food Water Shelter Sex. In archaeology we call those Modes of Production and Modes of reproduction. At a fundamental level those are the things that create a "civilization".

I suggest you look at the work of Marvin Harris and his idea of Cultural Materialism.
 
Back
Top