Religion in Star Trek's future

[T'Girl]

In certain episodes, Trek seems to hint that humans are taught that the supernatural is backwards and nonsense.

In which episodes is this?

That brings up the question of if humans managed to solve so many of their problems with mainly technology, why do they still practice religion?

Because their technology doesn't supply the answers to spiritual questions.

Why are we here, why am I here.

 

[Kor]

In the late seventies he embraced "The One." There is a brief description of this in the novelization of ST: TMP, and Spock believed in it.

It's been a long time since I read the TMP novelization, so I'm not sure exactly what was entailed in the philosophy of "The One."

However, at that point Roddenberry was distancing himself from various aspects of the TV series and promoting his secular utopian vision. So this was probably a retroactive attempt to explain Kirk's line, "Mankind has no need for gods. We find the one quite adequate." I've read that the second sentence was only included because of the censors of the time. And Roddenberry wouldn't like the idea of a line that sounds like it supports monotheism.

Kor

 

[Chronos]

That brings up the question of if humans managed to solve so many of their problems with mainly technology, why do they still practice religion?

Because their technology doesn't supply the answers to spiritual questions.

Why are we here, why am I here.

According to TNG: "The Chase", we're here because ancient aliens seeded DNA on various planets. We were the result.

 

[Starborn Dragon]

Star Trek is a religion.

Just like Jedis are a religion.

Just like Scientology.

I don't believe religion will end anytime soon. And probably not at all.

While I would love to see ti end, it really wouldn't change anything int he way humanity behaves. there will just be another reason to lash out, hurt, yell and scream at those whoa re different than them.

 

[T'Girl]

"The One."

It's been a long time since I read the TMP novelization, so I'm not sure exactly what was entailed in the philosophy of "The One."

I made a mistake Kor, it wasn't "the one," it was "the all."

The novelization of ST:TMP said that Vulcans have the ability to perceive a oneness with The All, the universe's creative force, or God.

According to Susan Sackett , who was Gene Roddenberry's personal executive assistant for seventeen years (and one of his mistresses), that part of the novelization came from Roddenberry's own belief in "The All" during the late seventies.

That was from Ms. Sackett's book, Inside Trek: My Secret Life with Star Trek Creator Gene Roddenberry.

"Mankind has no need for gods. We find the one quite adequate."

Perhaps a reference to Neo from the Matrix movies?

 

[Starborn Dragon]

Humanity often treats itself as its own god.

like in the remake of Clash In The Titans.

And that's one of the biggest problems humanity faces ebcause it only leads to a whole lot of atrocities and other assorted awful things.

 

[Timo]

Why would the concept of blasphemy go away even if everybody stopped believing in it? The concept of phlogiston hasn't mystically disappeared from the universe even though we know and generally agree it doesn't exist.

Phlogiston?!?!? This is a ridiculous example to use to make your point. I'm a pretty well-read guy and I had to look this up. And while it turns out that I am familiar with the idea, I didn't know the Greek word for it. No one is saying that the concept of "blasphemy" would have mysteriously evaporated from the universe in a totally atheistic culture, just that without a religious context it would no longer be in the common vernacular. I mean, come on, phlogiston? Seriously? When have you ever heard a random average person off the street ever use that word or casually discuss the idea enough to demonstrate an understanding of its meaning?

Seems I hang around the wrong sort of people. But yes, I tried to pick an extreme example. Concepts never die, and religions will always exist, but largely in the sense of Sherlock Holmes being real (just not a real person).

The thing is, words that once used to have a specific meaning now are being used for a different purpose altogether, exactly because the old meaning has few practical applications. Blasphemy certainly is common vernacular for secular ideas nowadays: "You dare doubt our business policy?"... It may be intended as humorous, but may come across as "passive-aggressive" or whatever that term.

FWIW, I've never heard the expression used in the religious sense around here (even though it literally translates from Finnish as explicit "God-mockery", somewhat narrowing down the applicability vis-á-vis "obscure" Greek). It does pop up in literature, though, especially as refers to a local court case from the seventies, just about the last time the word had legal meaning.

The closely associated "sacrilege" (Finn. lit. "shaming of saints") is frequently used in secular context, though, and virtually never in the religious one.

I think it's clear from the context that Kirk is casually condemning the precepts of polytheism, as opposed to monotheism. While it may be a inappropriately Western thing to say (what happened to Hindus by the 23rd Century?) it does seem to be what Kirk is talking about.

Never mind the Hindus, who (like so many major Earth cultures of today) make no explicit appearances in Trek (although Data minding their festival in "Data's Day" might mean something other than his usual interest in useless and outdated trivia). As monotheism would appear to be contrary to Vulcan beliefs, at least those held by Spock and Sarek, Kirk risks creating a tempest in the local plomeek bowl right there. Although I don't really see a reason for him to care - and I don't see a reason for him to speak a word of truth to this adversary!

Would Kirk even know about Vulcan religion? Spock is secretive, but perhaps not as secretive as the average Vulcan, or that culture at large. And certain other Starfleet personnel once expressed their option about "Vulcan mysticism" without convincing us that they knew the first thing about the subject at hand.

If it were the "Secular Ceremony Room" then what's the deal with the big orange space cross?

Oops, missed that.

I say that not to imply that the decoration is intended to be a form of Christian iconography. I assume it's just there to indicate that the space is meant for services of any religious nature and the decor is non-specific to any particular faith. Elsewise, why not use the ship's theater (or converted gym if you prefer)? The fact that there is a dedicated and specifically decorated space at all, suggests to me that it stands apart from secular duty.

But is it a dedicated space? It's just a redecorated set - perhaps the crew did the redecorating for this ceremony, and would convert the space into a Parrises Squares court the next day.

Also a no-brainer. We know that the world-wide conversion from Vulcan barbarity to Surakian ideals was a long row to hoe. There would be plenty of time for competing ideas to co-exist. And for factions to say "Screw you guys," and fly to Romulus. The less vocal cults who were prepared to agree to disagree would still be able to cook up whatever myths they pleased to. These ideas could later disseminate through countless means.

We don't know the "real" timeline of the events, but there's certainly room for this interpretation, too. It just doesn't sound as if Vulcan religion would go away even in the two thousand years after Surak - and those monasteries of old are still going strong in ENT. Did they convert from an older faith to Surakism at some point? "The Andorian Incident" doesn't tell.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Timo]

Humanity often treats itself as its own god.

How could it not? That's what today's monotheism is about: worshipping father for his human qualities of creating, judging, smiting, and then taking the weekend off.

And that's one of the biggest problems humanity faces because it only leads to a whole lot of atrocities and other assorted awful things.

Religion in all its forms is an attempt at outsourcing, of assigning to the supernatural that which can be found in the nature (including us) yet either not explained or at least not sufficiently simply explained in the narrative manner the human brain finds pleasing. When we outsource our moral decisions to divine forces, we also outsource our savagery, though: even the most idealized gods merely reflect our own failings (and strengths, but we are piss-poor at telling those apart).

The animists of old had it slightly better, as it was not all that easy to project human failings directly at oddly shaped rocks or the beauty of the bubbling creek. But once you go for the big man with the long white beard, you invite him to bring along his spear and, uh, spear.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Trek Survivor]

Star Trek is a religion.

Just like Jedis are a religion.

Just like Scientology.

I don't believe religion will end anytime soon. And probably not at all.

While I would love to see ti end, it really wouldn't change anything int he way humanity behaves. there will just be another reason to lash out, hurt, yell and scream at those whoa re different than them.

Because of course that's all religion offers.

 

[T'Girl]

Never mind the Hindus, who (like so many major Earth cultures of today) make no explicit appearances in Trek

What about the navigator in That Which Survives?

 

[Timo]

Hmm. There have been many Indian or potentially Indian characters. Whether Rahda with her apparent tilaka counts as an "explicit" Hindu and a genuine Shakta, we may wonder about: such things are popular even today as mere aesthetic decoration. But good point!

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Nightdiamond]

In certain episodes, Trek seems to hint that humans are taught that the supernatural is backwards and nonsense.

In which episodes is this?

In Who Watches the Watchers, Picard said abandoning belief in the supernatural was an achievement. He then said going back to this belief is going back to the dark ages.

In the Hands of the Prophets-- when talking about Bajoran religion and the Prophets, Jake Sisko said they weren't prophets, they were "just some wormhole aliens" that Sisko "found" in the wormhole.

When Sisko explains that the name could be considered accurate because they can see into time both ways, Jake replies "are you serious?"

There was strong dismissive tone in it, like Jake was taught for years there is no possibility of a supernatural, and that even curiosity or respect for it wasn't necessary.

Kieko was a little better, but even she wouldn't budge on the matter as far as terms were concerned.

Because their technology doesn't supply the answers to spiritual questions.

Why are we here, why am I here.

True. You can even see it in certain episodes with agnostic characters, their confusion.

But if they're saying it was their technology provides abundance, eliminates poverty, and keeps everyone in good health, the question remains, what do they expect from religion now?

They're even saying they solved their social problems on their own without religious help!.

What if they developed some new hybrid religion during this time period?

 

[Kor]

^ I think that people would still have metaphysical questions, and wonder "Is there nothing more?" as Spock said in TMP.
Especially when faced with their own mortality.

Kor

 

[Kemaiku]

There was strong dismissive tone in it, like Jake was taught for years there is no possibility of a supernatural, and that even curiosity or respect for it wasn't necessary.

Quite so, it makes for good fiction in movies and books, but little else.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

They're even saying they solved their social problems on their own without religious help!.

Which would be a highly problematic assertion given the role of various clergy members in movements for civil liberties and national independence.

 

[alpha_leonis]

Never mind the Hindus, who (like so many major Earth cultures of today) make no explicit appearances in Trek

What about the navigator in That Which Survives?

In "Data's Day", Data makes a reference to the ship's celebration of Diwali among the other events taking place on board that day. That's a sign that at least the religious tradition of Hinduism is still honored, even if we never meet an actual believer.

But Star Trek, like Science Fiction in general, does seem to assume that explicit religious belief will die away as part of humanity's future development. I see this not as a conscious effort, but just an unconscious result that atheist-humanist-nonreligious types tend to be disproportionately attracted to science fiction, so they're the ones whom the stories are written for (and by). Audience matters in any kind of entertainment, and sci-fi is no exception.

I can only think of a few exceptions to that rule (not counting Bajoran prophet-worship or Star Wars' Jedi, which were both invented for their specific storylines. Battlestar Galactica combines elements from ancient Greek mythology and Mormonism, but again the combination is fictional. Nobody in reality has ever practiced a religion quite like theirs.)

In other non-Trek franchises: Babylon 5 and Dune both feature self-identified Jewish characters. I remember being very surprised when I saw Ivanova sitting Shiva for her father, since that was the first time I'd ever seen a human sci-fi character practicing a recognizable modern-day religion. (Dr. Franklin in the same show was also religious, but "Foundationism" doesn't count for me since it was also invented for the show.)

By contrast, I was recently watching ST2:TWOK with my wife, who incidentally is an ordained Christian minister. She actually burst out laughing at Spock's funeral when Scotty started playing "Amazing Grace", a specifically Christian hymn. Spock is an alien, she notes, and probably wouldn't be a believer in any specific human religion. (Yes, he's half human but he mostly rejects the human side of his heritage.)

Interesting topic.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I think religion exists in the Star Trek future (For humans), just I think it's considered a personal thing not to be applied to passing judgment on others.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

Not religion itself, but the supernatural.

Same thing.

No. I'm a pantheist. We believe that the natural universe is divine. See such texts as Loyal Rue's Religion is Not About God and Nature is Enough or Ursula Goodenough's The Sacred Depths of Nature.

But Star Trek, like Science Fiction in general, does seem to assume that explicit religious belief will die away as part of humanity's future development.

No offense, but what Sci Fi are you reading? Wells, Asimov, Clarke, Bradbury, Heinlein, Dick and Sturgeon all dealt quite explicitly with religion, both currently existing religions and ideas about where religion might go in the future. Contemporary writers like Butler, Atwood, Card and Faber (just to name a few) all consider religious ideas and the evolution of existing religions in the future. SF is frequently very thoughtful and critical of organized religion and religious ideas but it absolutely does not assume that explicit religious belief will die away.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I don't think religion will die away, but I think religion taking precedence over things that are scientifically observable will.

Like, people will believe God is a force that influences the world for good, pray to him, and use their religion as a moral guidepost for themselves in their own lives, but will no longer deny evolution and medical science and will not try to impose limitations on others based on their own religion.

 

[dswynne1]

The depiction of religion can be categorized in two ways: alien contact (the Prophets, the Changelings, etc.) or lost advanced technology ('The Return of the Archons', 'The Paradise Syndrome', etc.). And usually, our heroes don't care unless the 'god' proves to be a threat to them or to others. That's when humanism kicks in, with the god being taken down a peg, and always with regret (since our heroes really do want an open dialogue (ie. '...to seek out new life, and new civilizations...).