In a world of Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Atheists, Judists, Hindus, and the few in between, is there really any more room for a new organized religion? It seems that the entire world has separated itself based upon a few belief systems and that those systems are the only viable options or those seeking to convert. But is this how it will always be?
The history of organized religion is documented, however thoroughly, and can be traced back to millenia ago. From the Egyptians to the Romans to Muhammad, variations of organized worship practices are abundant. It is understood that at the dawn of human civilization, religions were the tools of the rulers, providing justification for them to reign while also unifying the society.
Where we are increasingly globalized and compliant with the institution of government today, is there any unfulfilled void left as far as religions purposes goes; or are Jesus, Muhummad, and Siddhattha the last prophets humanity will witness and/or need?
With the rise of science during the last few centuries, it seems that religion has taken less a role in explaining natural phenomena. Now we can go to the doctor and ask exactly what is wrong with us instead of relying on a shaman. We can see stars and planets light-years away, instead of attributing them to Gods. Tsunamis and thunder are understood scientifically. The list can go on, but it is clear that we no longer need to be told what things are by somebody who claims to have direct connection with a spiritual world.
So, then, what purpose does religion play? Governments are quite well established throughout the world, virtually eliminating the need for a religion to justify their existence. Of course, religion does still play a role in unifying communities, however large. But, it also does much to divide communities and people to the point of hatred and even violence.
Therefore, can the argument that it helps unify be justified given the evidence for its effect to do just the opposite? This is an arguable issue, but I want to point out that religion is not the only method of unifying people and that there are more and more methods developing as we become less of an agrarian people and more urban-concentrated. I'm referring to things like entertainment venues, malls, and other structures where people gather and can share a sense of unity.
I ask again, what is religion good for? Is it just that we as a species cannot let go one of our earliest inventions? Do we really biologically need to believe in a higher power to survive? I would think not. May it be a "side-effect" of our ego? I would point to this as the most logical explanation as to why religion has persisted for so long. A perfect example is the fact that in the Bible it is said that God created man in his image. This serves no purpose, in my opinion, other than to glorify man and to picture man as God-like, thereby boosting our ego.
Therefore, it is the ego's vulnerability as a fragile, wanted, and deceitful entity, along with human's early curiosity and imagination and the need for a unifying structure in the past that led to religion in the first place. Now, I believe, the major contributor to religion's existence is human's resistance to cultural changes, the exercise of the imagination that it can fulfill, and the fear of post-life suffering that many religions threaten.
Because this blog is about mind uploading, I find it necessary to contemplate what form religion may take in a world, virtual or physical, inhabited by virtual consciousnesses. I believe the fundamental question to this is: Would virtual minds have imagination? It is human's imagination that has provided the foundation for religion to flourish. If clones do not have imagination, does that mean that they cannot fathom a higher being unrelated to the physical world?
This poses another question, is imagination computable? Imagination can be simply described as "exploring alternative possibilities or realities." If, however, a mind clone has access to all the information of the internet and also has the ability to process it, it seems that it could compute alternative possibilities and ultimately the possibility that there is a higher being unbeknown to both us humans and the clones.
I personally find it more believable that mind clones may start off with religious beliefs, due to their duplicating nature and the fact that their "originals" may be religious. But, if we let mind clones function independently of our own control in a virtual space/world, I believe that they would begin to have much more scientifically/logic-driven minds.
One's argument against letting clones get rid of religious beliefs may be that it also gets rid of their moral beliefs and their sense of community, thereby corrupting their personality. Personally, I see no base for that conclusion and find it false and arrogant to believe that atheists/realists are immoral and cannot have a sense of community. So that argument is irrelevant in my opinion.
Finally, as we progress scientifically into the next few centuries, will we need religion anymore? Maybe we can learn from the clones and let go of our fantasies in return for more scientific, reality-based beliefs.
To return to my original question, maybe the clones will create a religion of their own. Not one based on visions or prophecies, but one entirely unlike we have ever seen, because we did not create it. I can't imagine what this religion, if it could be called that, would even be like. It may be too advanced for our minds to comprehend. Will we see religious "start-ups" that compete in a capitalistic fashion? Would that mean that those virtual religions last for only a limited amount of time before a "better" one comes along? All I know is that nothing lasts forever, and the major world religions of our day are no exception.
Related: Will posthumans all be atheists?
No comments:
Post a Comment