Was Religion Necessary in the Past, and Is It No Longer Needed Today?
In today’s world, where artificial intelligence and the future of the robotic age are being discussed, is it still meaningful to talk about religion?
If it is meaningful to talk about religion in this age, what should its content be?
What does religion offer or provide to people in this era?
What are its constructive or destructive effects?
How much will religion support us in our projections about the future?
Does it have the potential to hinder our dreams about the future?
We are living in a time when humanity’s accumulation of knowledge and power has reached its peak. In traumatic or tragic times, people seek something to hold onto, something to embrace. This support may take the form of a metaphysical state. Or they may cling to a collective structure or identity. It may also be creating an ideology or attaching themselves to one. Behind these efforts lies a search for resistance, strength, and the will to survive. In turbulent times, we need principles that can be called the innate settings of human creation—such as purity, compassion, freedom, fair distribution and sharing, and rational principles of life. The structural essence of religions is, in fact, to preserve and spread these values.
One can invent an artificial or fabricated religion and find meaning under its umbrella. Or people may feel spiritually protected within such organizations. However, a human-made religious institution will naturally contain epistemically flawed ideas. Because no matter how intelligent humans are, they think under certain influences and conditions, and therefore cannot establish a system fully compatible with human nature.
Religion will continue to be a necessity as long as the being called human exists. As long as human nature is discussed, religion will continue to exist. Since religion gives its advice and guidance in accordance with human nature, it will remain a necessity. It can be said that the duration and likelihood of a belief or ideology remaining on the stage of history are directly proportional to its compatibility with human nature. Otherwise, even if it is not completely eliminated, it will be pushed to the margins and remain peripheral.
In today’s state models, since organizations meet most of the needs of societies and individuals, has the need for religion decreased? This is an important question. Let us consider some solutions established in modern states without reference to religion: banking, insurance, housing funds, inflation and monetary regulations, and organizations that arrange sports activities. When we say, “There must be morality in these organizations, and they must remain humane,” there can be two foundations supporting this demand: one is legal regulation (law), and the other is adherence to a system of values (belief), which is the fundamental motivation for being moral.
The main foundation of modern state organizations is law. They try to sustain everything through laws. In fact, in the construction and formation of law, the cultural and moral values of that era play a leading role. The most important factor underlying culture and morality is again religion. Let us assume that religion is not at the foundation of law and culture. Let us consider what is claimed to be “Western civilization,” which has a secular background. In a world where we constantly live with the fear of nuclear war, what are the reasons behind the conflicts and wars that cause these fears? Humanity, through international law formed on secular foundations, has not been able to prevent “tyranny and exploitation.” It can be said that the main reason behind this tyranny and exploitation is again religious motives and drivers. This is true. The issue is the need for a religion grounded in human dynamics. This does not mean that religious understandings do not produce problems. Religions based on the superiority of a belief or a community do create problems. However, what we mean by religion is a framework of belief based on “a compassionate God who desires goodness and justice for all humanity and the entire world.”
Morality can be developed independently of religion. But morality is not merely about knowing and advising. If morality is grounded in the concern of accountability and the fear of losing in an eternal life, it can have a stronger sphere of influence than laws. However, as Spinoza puts it, when a person attempts to deceive even God, religion also becomes ineffective. For such deviated individuals, there is no solution other than bringing them into line through laws.
If a religion, as a system of values, can produce virtue and morality, humanity will need it in every era. Marx was right when he said, “Philosophers have only interpreted the world; the point, however, is to change it.” Or these thinkers have always discussed how to struggle against evil. Yet we should have collectively attempted to eliminate evil. In other words, understanding and interpreting are one thing; changing is another. If religion aims to transform life toward what is humane and offers a system in line with this goal, then it is genuine and good. And such a religion will continue to be a necessity.
We are as much in need of the idea that the source of all existence is divine and must be respected and protected justly (that is, religion) as we are of air and water. Will humanity have a happy future? This is a question of cultural politics. Hope for the future is possible only through a cultural policy and project that unites the metaphysical, epistemic, and ethical domains. From a “cultural politics” that contains justice, compassion, and peace, social good will spread.