Religion in Star Trek's future

[Lance]

What do you guys think?

Despite several of Roddenberry's characters being distinctly atheist, as was Gene Roddenberry himself, my take on the concept has never been that religion doesn't exist in Star Trek's future, but merely that there are no longer disagreements over it. Ie, people are free to believe (or not believe) what they want, without other sides trying to impose their own viewpoint. Perhaps sonething in line with Thomas Jefferson's ideals about church and state being seperate entities, but on a much grander scale.

What got me thinking about this was that I recently rewatched "Where No Man Has Gone Before", the second pilot of Star Trek, and there comes a point where Gary Mitchell compares himself to a God and Elizabeth Dehner reacts, and Gary replies "Blasphemous?". It seems to me that the concept of blasphemy wouldn't exist if there weren't people who still practice a religious belief system.

Later shows tended to imply that humanity didn't really "do" religion anymore, but that other cultures with faith systems certainly still practice them (everybody from the Klingons to the Vulcans seem to have some kind of religious/faith based structure in their societies; and with the Bajorians it was made explicit). But even then, you'll get a character like Dr. McCoy, who in reverent tones replies to Kirk's inquisition of the God creature in Star Trek V with a curt "Jim, you don't ask the Almighty for his I.D!", as if Bones is certainly someone who believes in a God, even if James Kirk maybe is not.

So, I tend to look at religion in Star Trek's time as being not so much that it's been erradicated, but more that everybody who has faith, as well as those who don't, simply respect each other's own rights to believe whatever they like, and don't get in each other's faces about it. Seems like a very friendly, 'Star Trek' notion. I.D.I.C.

 

[C.E. Evans]

So, I tend to look at religion in Star Trek's time as being not so much that it's been erradicated, but more that everybody who has faith, as well as those who don't, simply respect each other's own rights to believe whatever they like, and don't get in each other's faces about it. Seems like a very 'Star Trek' notion.

It's pretty much the way it's been done in Trek from the start.

 

[CoveTom]

Kirk clearly believed in God ("we find the one quite sufficient"); Picard was clearly an atheist, yet his explanation of death to Data suggests that he believed there was some sort of "afterlife." Sisko ended up being a major prophet in another culture's religion, and ultimately even fulfilled that religion's prophesies. So there is definitely room for diversity of religious viewpoints in Trek.

With very few exceptions -- a couple of patented pompous Picard speeches, mostly -- not only do we not see religious conflict, but we don't even see the humans discussing their religious viewpoints. So I'd agree with the earlier take: religion still exists, in a variety of forms, but everyone just chills out about it and let's everyone do their own thing.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

But if your religion requires humanoid sacrifices you don't get into the Federation.

 

[Chronos]

Many cultures in Trek seem to be partially religious (depending on the individual), but religion is not brought up unless it is directly relevant. The only exception is Deep Space 9, where the majority of Bajorans are openly religious, but this does not prevent them from respecting other viewpoints -- for the most part.

One of the moments of conflict aboard Deep Space 9 involved Keiko teaching the children in her school about "wormhole aliens" without specifically mentioning them as "prophets" in a manner reminiscent of the opposition to teaching evolution in schools.

The only other instance of religious conflict I can think of is when Voyager came across a group of aliens who believed that they were sending their dead off to an afterlife, but were actually sending them into space. The Voyager crew sort of danced around the questions they received and tried their best not to offend the other culture, though.

Based on the two cases I can recall, I've come to the conclusion that it is taboo to attempt to refute, deny, or convert someone's religion. At least, it is in most of the Federation worlds. The notable exception seems to be that it is not taboo to teach something that is scientifically verified, even if the science disagrees with with someone's religion. Hence referring to the beings who live in the wormhole as "wormhole aliens" because it has been verified that they are aliens who live in a wormhole, and whether they are "prophets" fall outside the scope of the lesson.

 

[Albertese]

If religion were totally gone, then it would seem odd that the 1701 sports a seemingly dedicated chapel. We see it in "The Balance of Terror" where a wedding almost took place and then at the end of same where the bride went there to to pray for her lost fiance. We see it again for Kirk's funeral in "The Tholian Web." Although, there does not seem to be a chaplain. Seems to be a "bring your own service" affair.

As for characters, I get the feeling that Kirk and Uhura are probably some sort of future post-denominational nominal Christians, while McCoy is either the same or possibly identifies with some older traditional strain. Spock seems like quite the athiest, but I wonder if his mother, Amanda, might consider herself a Christian (or a Jew), as Spock does seem to know an awful lot about Judeo-Christian themes, even so far as hanging a painting based on Genesis chapter 3 in his cabin in TUC. And yet even Spock seems to adhere to Vulcan traditions and mysticism, which I doubt actually contain any idea of a central creative "God" figure. Though Surak seems to be revered in an almost Messianic capacity.

We never see a chapel on the E-D but that doesn't mean there wasn't one around the corner someplace. Perhaps Miles and Keiko simply chose to forgo the "church-wedding" and just have the ceremony at the same place as the reception as many couples do today.

Seems to me that in Trek's vision of the future, a person's religion is their own business. They are free to do whatever they choose, so long as no one gets murdered or whatever. I imagine proselytizing evangelist movements are not at all popular or common on Earth, and are probably few and far between on colonies as well. And human people really seem to keep quiet about their religious beliefs in the 24th Century; possibly an attitude that displays more of "current fashion" rather that an absence of religiosity. But people get cagey. When Weyon asks Sisko if he has any gods, Sisko responds with "there are things which I believe in" which suggests to me he's referring to probably a set of ideals to uphold, but could be pretty open. Perhaps in the 24th Century, it's just considered very impolite to discuss private religious beliefs beyond the circle of family and close friends.

--Alex

 

[Chronos]

And yet even Spock seems to adhere to Vulcan traditions and mysticism, which I doubt actually contain any idea of a central creative "God" figure. Though Surak seems to be revered in an almost Messianic capacity.

According to TNG: "The Gambit Part II", Vulcans believed in the God of War, God of Peace, and God of Death (and maybe others who are unnamed) before the Time of Awakening. During this awakening, the philosophy of Surak was adopted and, apparently, Vulcans no longer believed in the gods of old.

This is odd because in TAS: "Yesteryear" Spock mentions that he was on a journey to his family shrine "to honor our Gods." as though it were something that is often done.

Although it has been shown many times that Vulcans value tradition highly. It's possible that they still adhere to some of the old religious customs their ancestors practiced although their purpose is now more symbolic than religious. Vulcans may honor their gods in a metaphorical sense in order to acknowledge their historical significance.

At least that's my interpretation of what would otherwise seem to be two contradictory stories.

 

[Albertese]

^^^
Chronos, I like that explanation.

--Alex

 

[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.

The religious turns of phrase used today are often used by people who don't actually think all that much of them. Worrying about blasphemy or the Devil (as in "speaking of the Devil", say) isn't necessary for being mainstream Christian, any more than worshiping Jupiter ("by Jove!") is.

Kirk clearly believed in God ("we find the one quite sufficient")

That's an odd way of putting it, to be sure, as in the previous phrase Kirk established that mankind doesn't need gods. If anything, I'd take this as evidence that Kirk follows some atheist religion where The One is revered but anybody daring to refer to The One as a "god" is excommunicated, crucified and sent straight to Hell.

If religion were totally gone, then it would seem odd that the 1701 sports a seemingly dedicated chapel. We see it in "The Balance of Terror" where a wedding almost took place and then at the end of same where the bride went there to to pray for her lost fiance. We see it again for Kirk's funeral in "The Tholian Web." Although, there does not seem to be a chaplain. Seems to be a "bring your own service" affair.

Might be a religious chapel. Might be for purely secular ceremonies, though. Is Martine praying, or just returning to the location of her almost-happiness to be miserable?

Based on the two cases I can recall, I've come to the conclusion that it is taboo to attempt to refute, deny, or convert someone's religion.

That does seem to be the consistent case for our heroes, yes. But they often run into the actual gods of such religions, and it clearly isn't taboo to topple gods! This leaves the other practice of timid politeness somewhat hollow...

During this awakening, the philosophy of Surak was adopted and, apparently, Vulcans no longer believed in the gods of old.

Yet interestingly enough, there was still time for the myth to be created that the gods destroyed the Stone of Gol after the onset of peace...

Would peace come first and strict Surakism only later? Or would the logic-religion still allow for gods in the mythological sense?

The logic-religion supposedly includes the tenet "nothing unreal exists". But gods need not be unreal. Either Vulcans would have tangible proof of them existing (being telepaths, they'd be able to sort out personal delusions from collectively observed "supernatural" phenomena, and this being Trek, there might very well be powerful entities ruling over Vulcan). Or then God of War is the agreed-upon name for a very real sociological-biological phenomenon that dictates Vulcan aggression even though having no supernatural component to it whatsoever; the ancestors recognized the concept, too, and their somewhat more frivolous and mystical name for it has persisted.

This is odd because in TAS: "Yesteryear" Spock mentions that he was on a journey to his family shrine "to honor our Gods."

So, the family gods, perhaps?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[2takesfrakes]

The future does not belong to athiests, only - that's fantasy. Just as STAR TREK is fantasy. STAR TREK is also about its audience, some of which are in the "Bible Belt" of the USA. It's also about The Human Condition, obviously, and faith in something is very much a part of that. Even when Gene Roddenberry had a runaway budget with The Motion Picture and all of this creative control over the project, what is the theme of this adventure? V'GER requires a soul, to grow - to be truly alive - as we are - and it's the logical, reasoning Mr. Spock who realises and understands the need for this. That never had to be a part of the movie, but it's the nugget of truth all of this picture's epic film-making adheres to and revolves around. Even governments today rely very heavily on faith-based organisations to acheive its objectives. And like government and science, the power inherent in organised religion can be abused. The abuse of power is what's wrong with religion, not religion, itself. And even "hard-science" STAR TREK has to acknowledge that.

 

[Trek Survivor]

I agree pretty much with Lance. I think religion is alive and well in Trek's future, and just as now, some people believe, some people don't. The difference being there's a lot more tolerance from ALL sides in the future.

"My philosophy is that there is room for all philosophies on this station!"

 

[hux]

Perhaps sonething in line with Thomas Jefferson's ideals about church and state being seperate entities, but on a much grander scale.

Using the a US as an example, separation of church and state actually produces an increase in religiosity, not a reduction but we see no evidence of this in Trek. Admittedly, we don't spend much time with civilians or non-western cultures in the show. You're more likely to explain its scarcity by suggesting that the immense luxury and affluence of paradise is predominantly responsible

everybody who has faith, as well as those who don't, simply respect each other's own rights to believe whatever they like, and don't get in each other's faces about it. Seems like a very friendly, 'Star Trek' notion. I.D.I.C.

Has that ever been the case with dogmatic religion

I think you could argue that point more convincingly if humanity has abandoned dogmatic religion and embraced a general worldwide deism but again, that would still be based on a western interpretation. Trek rarely shows us what's happening in the rest of the world (I think we're supposed to assume that the rest of the world has been politely and bloodlessly westernised)

Like other areas of Trek, people just conveniently started being nice to each other all of a sudden

 

[Albertese]

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?

Kirk clearly believed in God ("we find the one quite sufficient")

That's an odd way of putting it, to be sure, as in the previous phrase Kirk established that mankind doesn't need gods. If anything, I'd take this as evidence that Kirk follows some atheist religion where The One is revered but anybody daring to refer to The One as a "god" is excommunicated, crucified and sent straight to Hell.

I think that's a stretch, to be sure. 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. (OTOH, I understand that Hindus believe their pantheon are all manifestations of a single god, Brahman(?--dunno if I'm spelling that right) so maybe this idea is more prominent in 23rd Century Hinduism and Kirk is being inclusive after all.)

If religion were totally gone, then it would seem odd that the 1701 sports a seemingly dedicated chapel. We see it in "The Balance of Terror" where a wedding almost took place and then at the end of same where the bride went there to to pray for her lost fiance. We see it again for Kirk's funeral in "The Tholian Web." Although, there does not seem to be a chaplain. Seems to be a "bring your own service" affair.

Might be a religious chapel. Might be for purely secular ceremonies, though. Is Martine praying, or just returning to the location of her almost-happiness to be miserable?

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

During this awakening, the philosophy of Surak was adopted and, apparently, Vulcans no longer believed in the gods of old.

Yet interestingly enough, there was still time for the myth to be created that the gods destroyed the Stone of Gol after the onset of peace...

Would peace come first and strict Surakism only later? Or would the logic-religion still allow for gods in the mythological sense?
....
Timo Saloniemi

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.

--Alex

 

[Lance]

Perhaps sonething in line with Thomas Jefferson's ideals about church and state being seperate entities, but on a much grander scale.

Using the a US as an example, separation of church and state actually produces an increase in religiosity, not a reduction but we see no evidence of this in Trek. Admittedly, we don't spend much time with civilians or non-western cultures in the show. You're more likely to explain its scarcity by suggesting that the immense luxury and affluence of paradise is predominantly responsible.

Well, I was thinking more of Jefferson's ideals, not necessarily the outcomes. As America was originally founded on the basis of freedom to practice religion without persecution, and that freedom had resulted in a population with a vast range of different belief systems all co-existing in the colonies, Jefferson was adamant that church and state be seperated, so that a central government couldn't just hand down a religion unto the populace against their will (ala the great Catholic/Protestant divide that was one of the main reasons the pilgrims left for the new world in the first place). Where athetism comes into it is that Jefferson believed that 'freedom of religion' was broad enough to encompass even those who don't even believe in God (quite forward thinking for a man from the 1770s). He was quoted at one point saying something like "I don't care if my neighbor believes in one God, three Gods, or no God at all". In his philosophy for America, every religion would have tolerance for every other, regardless of their differences, and that certainly there would be no central authority on which religion (or lack thereof) was the 'correct' one.

Naturally, humanity wasn't then ( and probably still isn't now ) ready for Jefferson's progressive thinking. Which is a shame. But nevertheless, that is what his thought processes really were when it came to seperation of church and state.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Kirk clearly believed in God ("we find the one quite sufficient")

That's an odd way of putting it, to be sure, as in the previous phrase Kirk established that mankind doesn't need gods.

I always took it to mean that Kirk is a Ranger.

 

[B.J.]

^ Heh.

 

[IrishNero]

Kirk clearly believed in God ("we find the one quite sufficient"); Picard was clearly an atheist, yet his explanation of death to Data suggests that he believed there was some sort of "afterlife." Sisko ended up being a major prophet in another culture's religion, and ultimately even fulfilled that religion's prophesies. So there is definitely room for diversity of religious viewpoints in Trek.

With very few exceptions -- a couple of patented pompous Picard speeches, mostly -- not only do we not see religious conflict, but we don't even see the humans discussing their religious viewpoints. So I'd agree with the earlier take: religion still exists, in a variety of forms, but everyone just chills out about it and let's everyone do their own thing.

I got from Picard's speech to Data that he seemed more open or 'agnostic' than atheistic. But I agree that it seems that belief systems are not referenced or called upon very much, unless by an alien race.

 

[T'Girl]

being distinctly atheist, as was Gene Roddenberry himself

Roddenberry at one point in his life stated that he was a Buddist. From comments he did seem to have a problem with organized religion, although perhaps not religion itself.

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. In the (non-canon) novel Spock's World, the Vulcan species possesses the ability to sense God.

But if your religion requires humanoid sacrifices you don't get into the Federation.

But you can have ritual fights to the death and send your seven year old children into the desert to see if they survive.

Many cultures in Trek seem to be partially religious (depending on the individual), but religion is not brought up unless it is directly relevant.

We hear about species with religion or religions, and often it doesn't come up in the story line, but iirc there's never been a atheist species.

 

[Nightdiamond]

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

Not religion itself, but the supernatural. But of course, its going to be attached to religion eventually.

That the belief in gods is a primitive process all intelligent cultures must go through, until they evolve solve their problems, and become an advanced society.

What I get from the hints and watching is that future humans have solved many of their problems without religion, but live in a democratic and free society where anyone can practice the religion they chose.

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?

Or maybe they altered a lot of things in their religion to fit their time?

 

[Kemaiku]

Not religion itself, but the supernatural.

Same thing.