How important is religion in society?

Apparently, human society needs religion to survive.In the book “Religion and Demography[1, the author shows that in the long run only religious communities raise enough offspring.Atheistic communities do not survive for 200 years due to lack and offspring, so they are unsustainable.

Supplement: Since these are empirical findings, this statement can of course only be about the historically manageable time range.The quote reads: “Whilenon-religious ideas can be observably capable of reducing birth rates voluntarily, argumentatively or even by state coercion below the conservation limit, we scientists were able to – despite several, even international appeals – so far empirically not find a single non-religious population in history or the present, which could have maintained at least the birth rate of two children per woman for even a century!

Note: There is no longer any mention of movements or communities with similarly high birth rates such as the Haredim, Old Order Amish or Quiverfulls; at the end of the day, we were only looking for examples of non-religious (= no higher beings worshipping) groups. , which could be obtained demographically even without an influx from the outside.” (Michael Blume, Religion and Demography, pages 168-169)

Second supplement: I have been asked for games.Since the discussion about the disappearance of various non-religious groups extends over 10 pages with corresponding graphics, and I have no desire to reproduce all 10 pages, I will confine myself to pages 169-172. If you really care about the subject, I recommend reading the book.

” There was no lack oftime and opportunities for a possible, non-religious wealth of children: for example, in India, non-theistic traditions such as Buddhism, Jainism, flourished in the first millennium before our time. and the atheist-religious philosopher school of Charvaka. But this religiously critical philosopher tradition, which can be proven up to the 16th century, never succeeded in establishing communities that were permanently flourishing somewhere or even a non-religious culture.

Buddhism and Jainism – as well as Taoism radiating from China – also survived demographically, by transforming themselves into popular religions, and after they were transformed into popular religions: for this purpose, the religious worship of ancestors and saints who continued to work higher beings such as deities and spirits “adopted” into the originally non-theistic teaching traditions and also abandoned original prohibitions of images and worship against the enlightened themselves.Like early Christianity, Buddhism, Jainism and Taoism changed from originally strongly antinatal positions to a mixture of celibate clergy and pronatal lay men (cf. Chapter. 2.3).

We find processes comparable to Asia when we look at pre-monotheistic, Greek and Roman antiquity: here, too, in deposition of popular polytheism (multi-god belief), there were already plenty of sceptical, atheistic and materialistic positions. – but on none of them could establish a permanently living culture or even a community.In fact, the lament of the ancient historian Polybios from the second century BC sounds strangely familiar: “In the time in which we live, throughout Greece the number of children, in general the population, has declined to such an extent that the cities are desolate. and the land is lying fallow, even though we have not suffered from wars of long duration or from epidemics [… because the people of great manhood, greed and recklessness have fallen into disrepair, neither marry nor, if they do, want to raise the children who are born to them, but usually only one or two, so that they may grow up in luxury and undivided the wealth of their Parents inherit, only for this reason the evil has spread quickly and unnoticed.” [27, 128 Only the demographic rise of Christianity was able to stabilize the family and birth situation centuries later.

It goes without saying that even in unconnected areas of the world, such as the Americas, the Pacific Islands or Australia, only religious cultures with tendentious lyrised pronatal teachings have been formed over and over again.Reliable evidence of non-religious and yet demographically stable populations in the past or present can not be extracted from the history of history.

The “Western” Enlightenment did not change this finding either, but rather continued it: outside of Europe, soon marked by alliances of thrones and state churches, it was above all the USA that offered comprehensive freedoms to atheists from the 18th century onwards.Not only religious groups such as the Amish or Hutterer, but also communists and socialists, anarchists and countless other non-religious communities of belief founded their own communities. And in a now classic study, Richard Sosis and Eric Bressler compared the longevity of these religious or non-religious projects in the US in the 19th century.

The findings were astonishingly clear: while secular church formations were received without exception (!) within a few years, those religious communities in particular survived for decades and centuries, which many “costly requirements” of their members had to meet. how sacrifice, food, clothing, and time commandments demanded, thereby creating a strong cohesion among believers.” (Martin Blume, Religion and Demography, pages 169-172)

Here are more recent examples.But to refute Mr Blume’s thesis, a single counter-example is sufficient.

Footnotes

[1 Dr.Michael Blume

Leave a Reply