Posted by Jason on: 05.09.2008 /
I’m a big fan of thought experiments, they help me to move away from an emotional response to an idea and view it logically. When I apply the logic that I gain from the experiment to a real situation I find that I have a better understanding of the issues. Where the experiment cannot be applied to the real world I find I have a better understanding of the concepts.
I read on the blog of a very anti theist type of atheist (much wore than me ;) ) a thought experiment where everyone on the planet lost all memory of the world and had to relearn all that they knew of the world. He proposed that religion would play no part in the reconstruction of society. I’m not so sure so I thought I’d reduce it to a simpler experiment.
This will help me to understand how some Christians can interpret their faith in God as knowledge of God and why some people stress that they would not necesarily have the religion of their home and family but would have the “right” one.
I suggest that colonists leave Earth and set up on another planet in a distant galaxy, too far to make communication reasonable, say 100 light years. Having limited space they take no books but store the sum of human knowledge on some sort of electronic media that can be read by the space craft’s computers. All colonists are stored in cryogenic sleep until their arrival and provided with data pertinent to their survival by some kind of direct learning machine. Now, let’s suggest that something goes wrong with the learning machine and the only knowledge that they end up woth is that which they need to survive. How to farm animals, raise crops, communicate with one another and operate the machines that they have brought with them. They have a wealth of information that is available to them, all the science, history, philosophy, medicine, religion, etc that is available on our own world but without the cultural bias.
Do you think that the colonists would adopt religion? If so, which one (or a new one) and why? What about successive generations descending from the colonists? How would they react to visitors from Earth who retained either their own religions or who had rejected all religion (the opposite to what you think the colonists would do)?
Comment by: Ir (Helen)
1I think some evangelists/missionaries would tell the colonists about Christianity and some of the colonists would believe them.
Plus at least one of the colonists would have some sort of personal encounter with Jesus which other colonists would disagree about. Some would say he had a hallucination and isn’t on enough medication. Others would say he really did encounter Jesus.
Thus I think, after a while, there would be some believers in Jesus in the colony, but not everyone would be a believer.
That’s just my opinion :)
That kitten is very cute, by the way! How is the cat yodelling coming along?
Comment by: Mike O
2That’s a good one! I think part of it would come down to “accepted” history. Christians think of the Bible as an historical document - where it lays out historical events (kings, judges, people and physical events) Christians hold it as trustworthy. Others don’t. I suspect the same thing would happen in the new colony.
When you say there is no cultural bias, would people retain their own opinions of what is and isn’t historically true - whether or not they are correct? Particularly, the Bible as it applies to history.
Comment by: Jason
3My take is that the colonists would look at the Bible, the Quran, the Bhagavad Gita, the Torah, the Tripi?aka and all of the other holy books in the same light. They’d view them as ancient books of wisdom. I think that the supernatural elements would be rejected as unverifiable but that many of the moral ideas would be adopted. I think that they’d pick and choose to suit the society that they were building.
Why do I think this? Well I do see everyone as being born as an atheist but learning religion and faith from our parents and peers. I don’t see anything inherent in humanity that requires religion. The colonists would all be, not atheist but, non-theist because they’d have no social programming for religion. When accessing the cultural history of their ancestors they’d dip into and select those ideas that were most relevant to their lives.
They wouldn’t know what was historically true so would either accept it all at face value or try to sort out the muddle of conflicting reports and opinions. I think that history would be a secondary consideration to building a future for themselves.
Whatever the result I don’t believe that a single religion would win out, rather a collection of good ideas and traditions would emerge that made sense to the community.
Helen, the cat yodelling failed miserably. I just got scratched. I was going to try it with the bunny but she’s not very vocal.
Comment by: Ir (Helen)
4Jason, I’m sorry to hear that the cat yodelling failed. We have nothing to try it with - we have hermit crabs, dwarf hamsters and a very old fish. Nothing that could yodel.
I think if people have personal revelations which manifest as one religion or another, that one will win out for them.
Comment by: Mike O
5I was out driving all day, thinking about this question.
You didn’t say this, but there is an unspoken assumption in your question, that being that there is no God. I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but since you’re coming from that perspective, you may have assumed it without realizing it.
There are really two deeper questions here, the way I see it.
1) If there is no God, would mankind develop the idea that there was a god if we didn’t have our learned biases to skew things?
2) If there is a God, would mankind become aware of that, even without our learned biases to skew things?
In one of your earlier posts, we talked about man’s inherent need for purpose, and that the concept of God may be nothing more than a mechanism to satisfy that need (my words, not yours).
Given that, if there really is no God, some people likely would “manufacture” a God to satisfy the need for purpose, and some wouldn’t. Same as today.
And if there really is a God, some would recognize him and others wouldn’t. Same as today.
Comment by: Jason
6Mike, that’s true. Well the assumption is either that there are no gods or that the gods choose not to reveal themselves. Either way there is no empirical, verifiable evidence for the colonists. Same as today.
If humanity is wired in such a way as to imagine gods or see supernatural events in the natural world then the colonists would surely see god in some form. If they are not and gods are a cultural invention then they would not see god, even if one existed.
Now, given the prevalence of gods in independent human cultures it is likely that very many cultures imagine gods. Note that this is true even if you believe that your god is real above the others. That is unless you assume that the other gods are aspects, servants or enemies of your own god. That’s a bit of a leap though.