I work next to a guy who's non-denominational, bordering on anti-religion. We've had a conversation a couple of times about religion, in general...
He feels religious philosophy and morality are not bad, but that religious institutions are almost inherently so: he feels religions lead to intolerance, persecution, and conflict.
In some ways I agree with him. On the other hand I think we find reason enough to kill and hate each other without religion. I credit religion for its positive aspects and try not to blame it for the way people misuse it.
One theme that's come up a few times is whether religion has helped advance civilization or hinder it. My friend feels that the earliest civilizations--Sumer and Babylon--were the products of science and not religion. He would probably point out the domestication of animals, cuneiform, pottery, geometry, architecture, plant domestication and irrigation.
But I think he's forgetting something. The reason cities formed was because people donated time to labor on temples and city walls and irrigation canals to support their priest-kings. Without that excess labor they would never have had surplus food to support their city, feed their king, priests and army. Without those things they would have been destroyed by marauders... Religion provided the impetus for corveé labor: they worked in order to appease the gods and avoid drought, flood, or attack.
Furthermore, priests were the world's first academics and scientists, language was religious in its inception, and law was as much religious as it was political. Babylonian science (including its astronomy and time system) influenced the Greeks. And Babylonian legal codes, combined with Greek philosophy, formed the basis of democracy.
Is it any wonder that the system created in Mesopotamia--cities run by priest-kings--would influence all of western civilization, which continued to be run by "priest-kings" all the way up until the Middle Ages and beyond? Think of the Holy Roman Empire, France, and England.
People will work, yes, but what were they working for if not religion?
8 years ago
1 comments:
i agree here. i think if they didn't have religion, people would just find another excuse to fight wars. when it comes down to it, religion is often used by those in power to manipulate the masses, but if not religion, something else. the crusades were really about imperialism and power, but religion served as a great motivating impeutus. if it hadn't been religion, it could just as easily have been some sort of nationalism, racism, or properly channeled economic anger. who knows.
Post a Comment