There are no extreme religions

Or, all religions lead to the same place

Few days ago I (for some reason I now cannot recall), posted the following statement on some social media channel:

Science is fundamentally eager to be proven wrong. Religion is the exact opposite.

To which some smart person retorted:

Your statement is flawed; someone might say that science is just another religion.

Then, a person with whom I’ve enjoyed a bit of prior professional collaboration, and who is a very good expert in his field, contacted me privately, asking if I have watched a science-vs-religion debate including a rather famous intellectual Christopher Hitchens. Intrigued (while still enjoying the time off during the seasons holidays), I sat down to watch the debate.

Mr. Hitchens is a stellar thinker, he’s an intellectual giant who was gifted with extraordinary eloquence and a wicked sense of humour. Obviously, the first 2.5 hours of the debate had just whetted my appetite. I eagerly started watching debate after debate that featured Mr. Hitchens, each one taking at least 1.5 hours. It was an intellectual roller coaster ride for me.

A shocking realization

At one point, after spending hours being engrossed in all the finer details of the debate for and against religion, I suddenly experienced something that could be quite easily compared with a bolt of lighting that came out of the blue sky. I jumped up and almost loudly exclaimed: “But this is insane, why are we even talking about this?”

Suddenly, while watching the learned professors and scientists and philosophers proposing arguments for and against religion, I felt as if we’re discussing some long forgotten practices. Like, for example, cannibalism. Or, sacrificing virgins by throwing them into active volcanos. Or some such silly notions.

Why are we, today, in the 21st century, debating religion? Isn’t religion totally behind us, haven’t we left it behind us for generations already? I mean, look, it’s now all over the news. Canada, the country where I live, is set to lose 9,000 churches. US churches are also on the decline. America is experience a great dechurching. There are even studies purporting to show why is that happening. The reports of dwindling religious practices are seemingly endless.

Then, another shocking realization followed: I suddenly realized that, even after spending many decades in both Europe and in North America, and meeting and working with and sharing friendship with many, many people, I have never, not even once in my life, met a religious person! I will repeat that: I have never met anyone who is religious. And believe me, I’ve met a lot of people.

So, to suddenly witness Mr. Hitchens’ opponents who were trying with all their might to demonstrate how religion is unavoidable, felt completely surreal to me. Who are those people? Obviously, they are the incumbents. Their livelihood and their social status depend on them having religious followers. Obviously, those incumbent are not going to all of a sudden go out and admit “yeah, we were wrong, religion is silly, let’s give those people their lives back!” They’re never going to do that. Which is why Mr. Hitchens is trying to show how wrong those charlatans are.

And that’s fine. But my question is: why are those debates even aired? Why push them to the mainstream? Obviously, any person who lives and works in the 21st century society has obtained enough literacy, enough education to be in the position to realize the silliness of someone seeing a burning bush and then using that hallucination to coerce, bully, and threaten gullible people. So, the debate on religion, at this point, and to me, seems completely pointless. Wouldn’t it be more desirable to let Mr. Hitchens shed light on more important subjects, such as how to improve our condition and how to achieve a more just society? Why waste such brilliant mind on some piddly stuff that was invented in the Bronze Age by some crafty shepherds.

But wait, what about the billions who believe in the supernatural?

First off, those billions are dwindling (see the above links pointing to the plethora of news that illustrate that dwindling). The billions of believers who populate the so-called developing world are merely waiting to be emancipated. Once emancipated, they will go on abandoning their faith the same way we’re seeing it abandoned here, in the Western Civilization. The Age of Reason is unstoppable, because people overall prefer convenient, comfortable living over martyrdom. And no other system is capable of offering the level of convenience and material comfort as the Age of Reason does. Technological advancements are unstoppable, and they trump any claims to supernatural powers.

What about ‘soft’ and ‘extreme’ religions?

Whether we feel inclined to label some forms of religion as soft, moderate, or extreme, is basically a distinction without difference. All religions, regardless of their manifested form, are fundamentally the same. All religions, extreme or not, claim that they have answers to ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING. You’ll never be able to find a religion (no matter how soft, progressive, moderate, etc. it claims to be), that would admit: “You know what, we really don’t have the answers to everything. Let’s leave our scriptures open to be disproved by some future evidence.”

No religion ever allows for that.

But the science? The science is fundamentally based on the principle of falsifiability. Meaning, science, and every scientist who practices it, are extremely eager to be proven wrong in anything they claim.

It is thanks to that openness that innovation and the improvements in the human condition are possible. People are free to remain stuck with the religion of their choice, creating a situation where every generation lives exactly the same as any other generation. But progressive humans (and there is a growing number of those), largely prefer to keep improving. And they do it by remaining open to experimenting, to challenging any and all hardened notions.