Religion in Star Trek's future

[Timo]

The difference between science and philosophy is that before any science is accepted it has to be proven in a controlled experiment in a reproducible way.

Well, not quite - cosmology and particle physics for their part rely largely on thought experiments that to some degree match the observable evidence but cannot be tested nor reproduced. They still produce an useful outline or framework of theories that one day might be tested; the concrete structure of science is still topped by quite a few floors made of cards, though, a state of affairs uncommon in other fields of science.

There's always a danger of name-calling in this context. Is it "rational" or "irrational"? Not a relevant question - relativity and quantum mechanics both fell within the latter category for a long time, and debate still rages to a degree. Is it "empirical" or "speculative"? Again misses the mark - you have to speculate in order to have something to test, whilst just testing something observable may produce no useful understanding yet. "Philosophy" or "science"? Many a philosopher in history should count as a scientist, while many a scientist should at best count as a charlatan.

What counts in the end is whether useful results are produced. And that calls for the scientific method when applicable, but leaps of faith when necessary. Would we eventually have gotten today's computing devices if not for irrational dabbling in quantum mechanics and relativity? Possibly. Or perhaps not. But drawing sharp lines between science and things like "faith" isn't helpful, and may even be counterproductive, in furthering the goals of science. Whether it's helpful in fighting non-scientific philosophies is a matter of debate... And whether debate is of any use in itself remains contested as well!

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Albertese]

Timo, as you seem curious about how the history of natural philosophy is taught alongside current science in different places, I'll tell you my experience. In my high school physics class (this was in the State of Washington, in the year 1994) we spent maybe an hour on the four classical elements and why they thought that's how it was and why we know it isn't really that way. That's chiefly how I know about phlogiston, though we only used English words in the course. It seems like maybe there was a world history class that briefly touched on it, too, but I forget. Honestly, for all I recall, it might have been in an English class also, trying to illuminate some Shakespeare passage or other that mentions the four elements.

There was an English class that covered the first three chapters of Genesis, but as ancient literature, not as an alternative to "how it happened." In fact, I recall that the unit made a big deal to point out how the Genesis text was really two pretty different creation myths woven together. It was interesting.

--Alex

 

[Starborn Dragon]

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Debate solved.

 

[T'Girl]

^ Magic is indistinguishable from advanced technology.

 

[Starborn Dragon]

^ Magic is indistinguishable from advanced technology.

Dodge turn parry spin thrust.

 

[suarezguy]

While Trek has had different approaches at different times, it seems that religion does gradually get less followers and less esteem.
The ceremony in "Balance of Terror" indicated there were still some believers Kirk/Starfleet would gladly accommodate, then in the movies you have McCoy and Spock referring to Genesis as myth (albeit containing some philosophical wisdom) and then in the 24th century Picard and Jake Sisko's hostility to religion (although there's still tolerance to the believers if not beliefs with both the Klingons and Bajorans).

 

[TheGoodStuff]

Thankfully, Trek is largely Atheistic in nature and while there are elements of the remnants of religion in Trek, it seems clear that it is dying and on its last legs.

Trek portrays a bright, enlightened, scientific future in which humans have let go of silly superstitions and irrational beliefs based millenia in the past. It is one of Treks strongest and most positive features that we do not need the evil that is religion.

The 'problem' with a thread like this, is that theists of course, find it deeply disconcerting to have their nonsense seem so obsolete in Trek and will battle valiantly to try and squeeze it back in.

Religion has done nothing but harm humanity and its absence is required for a Trek-like future in my opinion. It always saddens me to hear it referenced in passing in Trek [Data mentioning a Hindu festival for example] however I just write this off as a small few still practicing their 'traditional beliefs' among an overwhelmingly atheistic, sane crew.

 

[Albertese]

Thankfully, Trek is largely Atheistic in nature and while there are elements of the remnants of religion in Trek, it seems clear that it is dying and on its last legs.

Trek portrays a bright, enlightened, scientific future in which humans have let go of silly superstitions and irrational beliefs based millenia in the past. It is one of Treks strongest and most positive features that we do not need the evil that is religion.

The 'problem' with a thread like this, is that theists of course, find it deeply disconcerting to have their nonsense seem so obsolete in Trek and will battle valiantly to try and squeeze it back in.

Religion has done nothing but harm humanity and its absence is required for a Trek-like future in my opinion. It always saddens me to hear it referenced in passing in Trek [Data mentioning a Hindu festival for example] however I just write this off as a small few still practicing their 'traditional beliefs' among an overwhelmingly atheistic, sane crew.

Statements like this are no better informed or enlightened than Creationists who rail against evolution. Most any large institution that every culture on Earth has bought into has done both harm and good.

In fact there is a strong argument in evolutionary anthropology that human civilization could never have risen without the ideas of religion. One prominent theory regarding why we Homo sapiens have done so much better than our other hominid cousins is that they lacked the ability to envision things which they couldn't actually see. Neanderthals, for example, pre-date us by a wide margin and had way longer to develop a large complex society but did not. Our human imagination and tendency to assign agency to random things that happen is what gave us the leg up. And these were smart people we're talking about; Neanderthals where the ones who first developed industrial processes to manufacture glue for their spears. (Modern experimental archaeologists have tried to recreate the process to make the kind of adhesive they've found, only to learn that it's incredibly hard to do and you get only a tiny amount of the stuff, meaning that to get enough to be used on the scale we've observed, there must have been a huge coordinated effort.--An effort which none-the-less was unable to develop centralized civilization.)

So if religion is in fact only evil and does only harm, then you must also posit that human civilization on the whole is evil and harmful and we'd be better off living as hunter-gatherers making the same spears we've made for hundreds of thousands of years.

In Star Trek's future, human nature will not have changed so much that religion will have completely evaporated. I remain of the opinion that there are still plenty of people who hold not only spiritual belief, but are also centered around some kind of organized religion. It's certainly not a subject of public discussion, but to say it's just not there and only atheism equals sanity is a step too far.

--Alex

 

[Shawnster]

Religion has done nothing but harm humanity and its absence is required for a Trek-like future in my opinion. It always saddens me to hear it referenced in passing in Trek [Data mentioning a Hindu festival for example] however I just write this off as a small few still practicing their 'traditional beliefs' among an overwhelmingly atheistic, sane crew.

This reminds me of a true life incident a friend of mine shared with me. My friend had decided to join a particular Christian denomination and, as a result, would stop celebrating Christmas. Her atheistic brother was quite upset with her - not for joining a religion but, rather, for her decision to stop celebrating Christmas. The atheist was the one that wanted to continue celebrating the holiday.

This tells me that the holidays are not exclusively religious functions. Plenty of people, including many atheists, celebrate the holidays for the cultural and social opportunities. They don't care about the religious element, just so long as it's fun.

This touches back on the comment I made about observing Trek characters actually "worship" as opposed to merely participating in cultural festivals. Perhaps this Hindu festival is another example of atheists participating in a cultural and social event without giving it real religious significance.

I agree with the observations on the wane of religious importance in the lives of television viewers, especially Western countries. I highly doubt any future Star Trek will give human religions any importance, if they are mentioned at all. Cultural references will remain, but the impact and import of religion will continue to decline. This is a reflection of our times.

It's obvious religion, well, false religion, has been responsible for untold amount of bloodshed and oppression over the centuries. I'm a religious person, however, and I firmly believe it's possible to separate yourself from those who claim to be religious but fail to live up to the guidelines they profess. It's hard to say a group genuinely loves their neighbor and will not kill then turns around and slaughters neighboring countries. It makes you wonder which tank they think Jesus would ride on.

 

[T'Girl]

Thankfully, Trek is largely Atheistic in nature ...

Difficult to see how you would pick up a general atheist theme to the show, there are (again) several examples of religion and sprituality. And the character who are shown to have no overt position could be either religious or agnostic and not atheist. In one scene, Picard states that there are crewmember from dozens of species serving aboard the Enterprise, each with their own beliefs and he respected them all. Hardly the words of a atheist. Plus Picard does believe in life after death.

Picard may not personally embrace all of those beliefs, but he is capable of respect for them.

So at least a open minded agnostic.

The 'problem' with a thread like this, is that theists of course, find it deeply disconcerting to have their nonsense seem so obsolete in Trek and will battle valiantly to try and squeeze it back in.

Not necessary to "squeeze it back in," the writers were nice enough to include it in the various series.

Religion has done nothing but harm humanity and its absence is required for a Trek-like future in my opinion.

A opinion not shared by all, but there room for your position in God's great universe.

 

[Shawnster]

Religion has done nothing but harm humanity and its absence is required for a Trek-like future in my opinion.

A opinion not shared by all, but there room for your position in God's great universe.

Hey, now! We'll have none of that IDIC nonsense here. Sand hugging Vulcan hippie!

 

[The Wormhole]

In one scene, Picard states that there are crewmember from dozens of species serving aboard the Enterprise, each with their own beliefs and he respected them all. Hardly the words of a atheist.

How isn't it? One can respect the beliefs of others without subscribing to those beliefs. Being an atheist is not the same as being a close-minded bigot, an atheist can respect the beliefs of a religious person without sharing those beliefs.

 

[T'Girl]

Being an atheist is not the same as being a close-minded bigot

 

[HIjol]

atheist

http://static.sfdict.com/staticrep/dictaudio/A07/A0778000.mp3
[ey-thee-ist] /ˈeɪ θi ɪst/


1. a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

 

[T'Girl]

Encyclopedia Britannica

Atheism, in general, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. As such, it is usually distinguished from theism, which affirms the reality of the divine and often seeks to demonstrate its existence.

Atheism is also distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open the question whether there is a god or not, professing to find the questions unanswered or unanswerable.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/40634/atheism

 

[Horizons96]

Thankfully, Trek is largely Atheistic in nature ...

Difficult to see how you would pick up a general atheist theme to the show, there are (again) several examples of religion and sprituality.

Yes there are tonnes of examples of religious belief and spirituality in Star Trek. It is certainly depicted, often in alien cultures, sometimes representing/reflecting present day real life human parallels.

The central theme of this current debate, I feel, is how Star Trek depicts humanity's future. The overall tone of all the series' is - without any question - that humankind has much less of a reliance, if not has completely relinquished beliefs in theism/supernaturalism in the future.

 

[The Wormhole]

Being an atheist is not the same as being a close-minded bigot

Admittedly, I was tired when I read your other post, but it seemed to me that when you said

Picard states that there are crewmember from dozens of species serving aboard the Enterprise, each with their own beliefs and he respected them all. Hardly the words of a atheist

you were indicating Picard couldn't be an atheist because he respects the beliefs of others differing from his own. And while an atheist by definition doesn't have religious beliefs, one can still respect the religious beliefs of others and not be any less an atheist.

Perhaps the "close minded bigot" part was uncalled for, like I said I was tired, but I don't get how someone saying they respect the beliefs of others makes them less an atheist. Would a Christian saying he respects the beliefs of Jews make him less a Christian?

Although, I agree, in general Picard seems more agnostic, given he does believe there is some sort of afterlife

 

[hux]

Picard states that there are crewmember from dozens of species serving aboard the Enterprise, each with their own beliefs and he respected them all. Hardly the words of a atheist.

I'm not sure you understand atheism. You're essentially saying if someone is open minded to the beliefs of others, they can't possibly be an atheist

This is what's known as gibberish

A opinion not shared by all, but there room for your position in God's great universe.

And there's room for yours in a Godless one

Religion has done nothing but harm humanity and its absence is required for a Trek-like future in my opinion.

A opinion not shared by all, but there room for your position in God's great universe.

Hey, now! We'll have none of that IDIC nonsense here. Sand hugging Vulcan hippie!

Except it isn't the IDIC. It's the exact opposite

Infinite diversity in infinite combinations.....UNDER ONE GOD!

 

[TheGoodStuff]

Thankfully, Trek is largely Atheistic in nature and while there are elements of the remnants of religion in Trek, it seems clear that it is dying and on its last legs.

Trek portrays a bright, enlightened, scientific future in which humans have let go of silly superstitions and irrational beliefs based millenia in the past. It is one of Treks strongest and most positive features that we do not need the evil that is religion.

The 'problem' with a thread like this, is that theists of course, find it deeply disconcerting to have their nonsense seem so obsolete in Trek and will battle valiantly to try and squeeze it back in.

Religion has done nothing but harm humanity and its absence is required for a Trek-like future in my opinion. It always saddens me to hear it referenced in passing in Trek [Data mentioning a Hindu festival for example] however I just write this off as a small few still practicing their 'traditional beliefs' among an overwhelmingly atheistic, sane crew.

Statements like this are no better informed or enlightened than Creationists who rail against evolution. Most any large institution that every culture on Earth has bought into has done both harm and good.


In Star Trek's future, human nature will not have changed so much that religion will have completely evaporated. I remain of the opinion that there are still plenty of people who hold not only spiritual belief, but are also centered around some kind of organized religion. It's certainly not a subject of public discussion, but to say it's just not there and only atheism equals sanity is a step too far.

--Alex

The bolded is an utter falsehood. There is absolutely no evidence to believe in the myriad of fantasy beings which humans have dreamt up over millenias. It is FAR more logical and 'well informed' to come to the rational conclusion that religion is a blatant falsehood. To even compare Strong Atheism and Creationsim highlights your mental position on the entire matter. As Hume said, religion is nothing more than the evolution of Animism.

Atheism does not equal sanity, it equals reality. Whether you like it or not, living your life by one religion [out of millions] created millenia ago, is farsical and out of touch with reality ESPECIALLY a 24th century reality. This is without discussing the philosophical problems aliens and the galaxy as a whole would pose for organised religion.

Thankfully, Trek is largely Atheistic in nature ...

Difficult to see how you would pick up a general atheist theme to the show, there are (again) several examples of religion and sprituality. And the character who are shown to have no overt position could be either religious or agnostic and not atheist. In one scene, Picard states that there are crewmember from dozens of species serving aboard the Enterprise, each with their own beliefs and he respected them all. Hardly the words of a atheist. Plus Picard does believe in life after death.

Picard may not personally embrace all of those beliefs, but he is capable of respect for them.

So at least a open minded agnostic.

That is all spurious. Watch 'Who Watches the Watchers'. Religion equates religion to sending a species back centuries to genocides and crusades. Those species on board that you quote also, are not human thus not relevant for this conversation. We are not discussing allowing people freedom of religion we are discussing the majority of humanity abandoning it which seems overwhelmingly likely. Think of all the Trek's and all the scenarios they are in, there is a distinct lack of praying to deities for help etc.

The 'problem' with a thread like this, is that theists of course, find it deeply disconcerting to have their nonsense seem so obsolete in Trek and will battle valiantly to try and squeeze it back in.

Not necessary to "squeeze it back in," the writers were nice enough to include it in the various series.

Religion has done nothing but harm humanity and its absence is required for a Trek-like future in my opinion.

A opinion not shared by all, but there room for your position in God's great universe.

Sorry, which 'god'? Brahman? Zeus? Quezalcotl? Odin? Yahweh? Izanagi?

You'll really have to narrow it down [and forgive me for not typing out the other 999, 994...].

 

[Kemaiku]

Closer to several thousand entities listed as deities, up to several hundred credited with single handedly creating the universe, which are all held as correct by at least a small number of people somewhere.

But of course, they're all right, apparently. Because to say otherwise is to some, the idiotic stance.