Should God be Exported to Mars?

Scott G. Beach · 2004-02-02 22:46:04

The United States Supreme Court will soon hear a case about a law that added the words "under God" to the pledge of allegiance. The man who brought that case believes that the government should not encourage people to believe in the existence of supernatural beings.

In a novel titled The Songs of Distant Earth, author Arthur C. Clarke wrote about a human society on a planet named Thalassa. A terrestrial visitor to Thalassa said, "I wish I could meet some of my long-dead colleagues and let them know how many of our endless arguments have been finally resolved. It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints."

Will the future validate Clarke's fiction? Can Martian society be religion-free? Can science become the foundation for a comprehensive worldview? And will religion then become obsolete?

Should Martian laws prohibit Martians from advocating the existence of supernatural beings?

Hazer · 2004-02-03 00:19:39

Should Martian laws prohibit Martians from advocating the existence of supernatural beings?

Ah, no. That stinks of thought control. Not all rational people think alike.

Aetius · 2004-02-03 04:35:27

The real question might be, "Will the local government of any off-world colony use totalitarian measures to punish its citizens for the expression of religious sentiment?"

I see a situation where an official cult of atheism will unite and radicalize every believer on Mars. Homegrown terrorists of every faith, supported by Terran religious organizations, will cooperate to bring your government to its knees. I don't see this as an attractive option.

Besides, do you know what a fatwa is?

clark · 2004-02-03 06:53:50

The United States Supreme Court will soon hear a case about a law that added the words "under God" to the pledge of allegiance. The man who brought that case believes that the government should not encourage people to believe in the existence of supernatural beings.

So exchange one unyielding belief for another? Progress.

A terrestrial visitor to Thalassa said, "I wish I could meet some of my long-dead colleagues and let them know how many of our endless arguments have been finally resolved. It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints."

Am I the only one that sees the irony in choosing this quote from Clarke's story? He wishes to meet some of his dead friends... to tell them that a culture can be completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints! Clarke is answering you Scott. :laugh:

Will the future validate Clarke's fiction?

No, it is science fiction. Science fiction is good at predicting hardware, not how people will conduct themselves hundreds of years in the future.

Can Martian society be religion-free?

No, unless of course it is imposed. Look how finely ingrained it is within our ideas- Phi, for example.

Can science become the foundation for a comprehensive worldview?

If Science can answer the 'Why's', then, and only then, can it hope to replace Religion in any capacity.

We go to Science class to understand how the world works. We worship god in the hope of understanding why the world works.

Should Martian laws prohibit Martians from advocating the existence of supernatural beings?

Why should any law prohibit people from advocating for the belief in a supernatural being?

dicktice · 2004-02-03 09:58:05

It's funny, Clark--but when I think back on it, you know, science fiction hasn't been all that good at predicting future hardware. Spaceships had "rocket tubes" that continually had to be "relined." Radio, much less television, wasn't used to communicate with Earth--you were on your own en route and when you got to Mars, for example. Earth from space was green, and cloud-cover was never even mentioned. Rocketships launched vertically, were single (unstaged), streamlined and landed tail-first. Guidance and "astrogation" was done from "the bridge," without any assistance "from Houston." Weightlessness was "freefall" and non-injurious over time. Solar flares weren't a factor to be concerned about. Space "platforms" in permanent orbit never had to be re-boosted, and nothing ever burned up on reentry. Computers just got bigger and bigger, until they (at most two, worldwide) threatened to take over civilization. Solid-state physics, intergrated circuits, and personal computers never happened. Air-traffic control would consist of "beams," and GPS-sensed and -controlled airspace was never conceived. Automobiles and surface traffic gridlock never came up, and air pollution from car exhausts leading to smog not a problem, since future cars wouldn't be running on petrochemicals. Nihilistic suicide bombings and/or suicidal transport aircraft highackings weren't conceivable, at a time only a few nostalgicyears ago when terrorists only demanded ransoms to let their hostages go, because they wanted to live afterwards too. I can't remember a single thing that science foretold, with any sort of accuracy. But--wasn't it fun, when the world seemed safe and humdrum for us fortunate enough to have time to indulge ourselves reading all that wonderful silliness. What it told us was: what WASN'T going to happen, that's what it did--and continues to do so.

jadeheart · 2004-02-03 13:58:42

Religion will find its way to Mars one way or another. I would like to see an attempt at an atheistic society but I think it would be impossible. I have a feeling that people in general have a genetic predisposition toward religion. And I agree with Aetius and others that the authoritarianism that would be required for 'religious cleansing' of new Martians would be monstrous. (Just look at the Soviet Union and communist China.) And Clark makes a good point about the 'why' vs. 'how' thing. (I might add, however, that I personally get thru life fine without the 'why' being supplied to me... but of course I can speak only for myself. If I were feeling more mischievous I might prod somebody to explain how religion really provides the 'why'.)

Your ideal case, Thalassa, could only be created because the first generation of humans there (if I remember the plot correctly) was spawned artificially by a robot ship upon arrival. So they were somewhat free of the biases and superstitions of parents/grandparents etc. Even then, though, I wonder if the Thalassan society would have developed religion(s) on its own. Maybe not, since the information given the individuals as part of their education was based on science and religious ideas were weeded out (they were, right? it's been a long time since I read it). If you take the viewpoint that religion is a vestige of human prehistory, a holdover from the days before science existed to explain the unknown, maybe the Thalassans could leapfrog over this period of 'investigative naivete' using their pre-stored information from Earth that explains natural phenomena scientifically.

I hope this analysis isn't seen as dismissive by any religious folks here, I just wanted to develop a viewpoint from outside the religious perspective.

clark · 2004-02-03 14:06:57

Religion provides a context by which to connect disparate events and observations into an integral whole, which provides for a basis of understanding that which cannot be understood.

Science will explain the basis of life, but not why there is life. For what purpose? To what end? Is it just a quirk of universal exsistence, or is a part of the grand design that is the observable universe?

Why do bad things happen to good people? It's a qualitative question that cannot be answered by a quanatative science. Why do I dislike cheese? Is there something wrong with my tastebuds? Why do we love? Is it just a series of chemical reactions acting out upon our genetic map to make us act in a specfic manner to continue the biological process of life?

After you get beyond the mundane, you start asking some harder questions. Why should I be good? Is there even good? Isn't it all just a series of cause and effect that resulted from the eventual accident that is the observable universe?

Science can't even tell us. And it's hands are cold, so why would we use it to make us feel better about the unknown?

jadeheart · 2004-02-03 14:31:16

You ask a lot of questions there, Clark, but I don't see many answers. The closest thing I see to an answer is your last question, which basically breaks things down into feelings-- which I grant are a wholly different arena from science by the very definition of science. Religion provides comfort and hope. (Both very, very good things.) But this is hardly an explanation of why things are, beyond defining the 'why' as springing from the inscrutable will of some supreme being.

To me, the only difference is how one chooses not to think about the 'why': By passing the buck on to a higher intelligence/morality (God) or just choosing not to really think about it. Each to his/her own. Life follows its course and the best we can do is enjoy the ride and try to make it enjoyable to others.

Bringing this back around, I don't think the question will be answered on Mars. Maybe Thalassa, but not Mars. Besides, this horse has been beaten for centuries by philosphers with much larger bludgeons than I have, and it's still quite alive and kicking. And I don't wanna get kicked.

atitarev · 2004-02-03 17:44:35

Great topic, guys. Haven't read in full yet, will do it later. I just want to add my opinion. I agree with Jadeheart, that religion will find its way to Mars, anyway, and we shouldn't try stopping it. If we do, we make religious people against Martian exploration and colonization.

Also, as Jadeheart mentions China and the Soviet Union, the result of the religion ban is that, there are too many people now in Russia who believe in God, because they were not allowed to do it before, they are filling the vacuum that happened after the big bang. I am amazed at the number of young people going to church now and the number of new religious sects and movements in Russia - I live in Australia but being a Russian I follow the news.

I had a chat with my work colleague, who is religious about Mars colonization and he said that it would be against God's will to go to Mars because it will be liking like playing God. I manage to persuade him (I don't believe in God!) that God will be happy to see people on Mars - believers or not believers.

I recall a passage in Mars trilogy about arabs on Mars praying when they face Earth. One of the characters asked them, how they solve the problem of not knowing where Mekka is.

Sorry for the bad English.

Scott G. Beach · 2004-02-03 18:01:16

Jadeheart:

You wrote, "I have a feeling that people in general have a genetic predisposition toward religion." I agree with you on this point. Complex organisms that can learn (rats, pigeons, humans, etc.) seem predisposed to become superstitious. See "Superstition in the Pigeon," Journal of Experimental Psychology (1948, no. 38, pages 168 - 172).

I do not know whether "It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints." However, I believe that as people gain a scientific understanding of their behavior then they will be less inclined to be superstitious and they will be less inclined to believe in the existence of supernatural beings.

If all of the members of a Martian settlement were naturalists (rather than supernaturalists) then they might answer the big "why" question by simply noting that living organisms -- including humans -- tend to migrate into every niche in which they can sustain and reproduce themselves. Daily questions about "What should I do?" could be answered by their Sociocultural Development Plan. (I recently revised my draft Martian constitution to require that all chartered Martian settlements shall have such a plan. The primary intent of that amendment is to prevent overpopulation and warfare. See [http://www.geocities.com/scott956282743/owningmars.htm]http://www.geocities.com/scott956282743/owningmars.htm .) A settlement's plan might serve as the moral compass by which people live their lives.

I do not know whether this would work or not. I think it's an experimental question. If The City of Euthenia were built, I would want live in one of the 8 experimental neighborhoods and participate in efforts to answer this question.

dickbill · 2004-02-04 09:24:36

Yes.
I have an ultime argument that any Good American can understand. At the origine, God created Earth and Moon, together, in the same chaos. But God separated Moon from the Earth. Why's that ?
Because Moon is Evil. Then, God didn't create the Great American Race to go to an Evil Planet, right ?
He said "growth and multiply" in all my creation but don't eat the Evil fruit.
American went there but didn't stay, according to God's will.
It's all pretty clear for me.

Omer Joel · 2004-02-09 01:26:33

I don't think that a government of any kind should have an official policy regarding religion; the two extreme examples of governmental religious control are the USSR (which outlawed religion) and Iran (in which Islam is the law), and both were/are (The USSR was, Iran still is) ruthless dictatorships.

Religion is a personal thing. As long as one's religious practices harm no other, he or she should be left alone to worship his or her God/ess/es. This is the essence of democracy - freedom of faith, of thought and of religious practice.

A government should stay as far away from religion as possible, for the good of its own citizens. Governments exist to deal with practical things, and only cause harm when they start to impose a religious belief/disbelief from abouve. We should bring our religions along with us to Mars, but try to leave dictatorship and Big Brother behind.

jadeheart · 2004-02-09 17:58:27

Because Moon is Evil. Then, God didn't create the Great American Race to go to an Evil Planet, right ?

:laugh: :laugh: He ties in other threads AND converts the religious at NM to the cause of Mars Direct.

'Thou shalt not be distracted in the spreading of the human seed beyond Earth by the Moon, that which contains and embodies all evil that I expunged from the Earth.'

Or to paraphrase David Bowman: "All these worlds are yours, except Luna. Attempt no landings there unless you want to waste large amounts of time and money."

clark · 2004-02-10 13:46:12

Well, if the Chinese get there before us, it will be, "All your moon belong to us." :laugh: (this was a joke, if you don't think it's funny, it's becuase you are taking it waaaay too seriously)

A simple rule of thumb, I shall respect your right to believe as you wish, but please respect my right to believe that you are wrong. If you don't, then why should anyone bother to respect your beliefs to begin with?

We don't need rules or laws for this, just common sense.

replicant7 · 2004-02-17 11:04:32

Omner Joel....you said it all before I got the chance.....so true !!!

Hazer · 2004-02-17 21:57:47

Let Mars be an ideological free-for-all (Unless your ideology happens to endorse blowing up vital life support systems)!

Alt2War · 2004-02-18 02:37:26

I predict that one of the first 3 private colonies on mars will go with the expressed intent of living in a religion based socieity unhindered.

It's what drove a lot of folks to the US.

Palomar · 2004-02-18 07:44:00

I predict that one of the first 3 private colonies on mars will go with the expressed intent of living in a religion based socieity unhindered.
It's what drove a lot of folks to the US.

*Interesting thoughts, Alt2War. I would respond by saying the first colonies will likely be populated by scientists, engineers, etc., etc...but many of those folks are religious as well (nominally or otherwise).

I don't think the question is "SHOULD God be exported to Mars"...I think the more apt question is: "WILL God be exported to Mars"? Actually, the question seems a bit unnecessary; as many people are religious and do believe in God, it seems "a given" that religious beliefs will (sooner or later) follow colonists themselves...just like the vast array of human emotions.

I'm agnostic. If people want to believe in religion or whatever, have at it. I do feel that religion often (but not always) demands a respect it does not deserve -- in my opinion.

Even many of the 18th century Enlightenment thinkers insisted on at least a belief in God; even men who were accused (falsely) of being "atheists," such as Thomas Paine and Voltaire. They genuinely seemed to think that not believing in God was some sort of terrible dishonesty -- to one's self, one's fellow creatures, and the entire universe even.

So it seems that, to many people, you're "not quite human" if you don't *believe* in God...and that being an atheist or even an agnostic is some sort of horrible "anti-socialism."

That is my perception (it could be faulty, granted).

--Cindy

Gennaro · 2004-02-20 10:59:37

To be member of a religious sect, like the people who went to America, you'll have to have a geo-centrical primitive mindset. I just think humanity has left the religious stage behind.

Secondly, there's no persecution of religious beliefs nowadays.

That's all.

Bill White · 2004-02-20 11:12:53

Religion is like rocket fuel. Dangerous stuff if mishandled yet it might be the only motive force strong enough to get people off this planet.

Palomar · 2004-02-20 11:32:57

Religion is like rocket fuel. Dangerous stuff if mishandled yet it might be the only motive force strong enough to get people off this planet.

*...and, conversely, it might be the only motive force strong enough to keep us ON this planet. (I recall the excellent thread you began long ago, regarding "end-times" prophecies and the like, and how such beliefs may serve to put a damper on space exploration...such as two very close relatives of mine who wonder why we're even bothering with *probes*).

--Cindy

Bill White · 2004-02-20 11:49:36

Religion is like rocket fuel. Dangerous stuff if mishandled yet it might be the only motive force strong enough to get people off this planet.
*...and, conversely, it might be the only motive force strong enough to keep us ON this planet. (I recall the excellent thread you began long ago, regarding "end-times" prophecies and the like, and how such beliefs may serve to put a damper on space exploration...such as two very close relatives of mine who wonder why we're even bothering with *probes*).
--Cindy

True. Too true.

Recall all those videos of early American rockets exploding on the launch pad. Just last year the Brazilians killed 22 people when their rocket exploded on the pad.

Didn't the Russians kill a whole buch of scientists when a high party official came to witness a launch and the fool thing wouldn't fire? The story may be apocryphal yet if I recall, dozens of top Soviet rocket scientists were killed while trying to figure out why it didn't fire and someone whacked something with a screwdriver. Ka-Boom!

Thats what I said. Dangerous if mishandled.

= = =

Edit to add

New [http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/b … 98,00.html]Zubrin link:

Zubrin, the author of numerous books on colonizing space, was an astronautical engineer for Lockheed Martin who was intimately involved with NASA. He and the Mars Society, founded in 1998 in the Glenn Miller Ballroom on the University of Colorado campus, are now working at the fringes of established space programs.
Zubrin likens the Mars Society's vision of a manned Martian colony to the 19th-century Mormons who settled in the Salt Lake basin. Like the Mormons, who sought an empty space in which to create their own social order, those who would colonize Mars would be exercising their "right to cut one's own path and make one's own world."
In that sense, Zubrin's libertarian-friendly pronouncements and zeal for establishing a Martian colony reminds us of 19th-century planners of political or religious utopias - colonies carved out of an unpopulated wilderness where the ideals of a group of like-minded people could form the basis of a new society.

Memes can be infectious!

clark · 2004-02-20 13:33:56

Perhaps polygomy will get a second chance after all.

Someone needs to finish their book and send a copy to Zubrin...

Rxke · 2004-02-20 15:34:36

An interesting (but probably totally unaswerable) question : how much will being on Mars change the religious people there?

Yeeeeeaaaars ago a teacher told me (dunno if he thought it up himself or not) that the judean/chrisian/muslim idea of a 'timeless' God was inspired simply by living in the desert... seeing the timeless sands and rocks, unmoved etc... influenced the people in their God image... As opposed to for instance the Celts that lived in 'green land' seeing old strange trees etc... they shaped their gods as beings in nature etc...

Going back to a desert (Think the Dune sci-fi/fantasy books) planet, where virtually all you will ever see is sand, rocks, eons and eons written in stone... Must have *some* impact on the 'soul'...

Palomar · 2004-02-20 16:22:31

An interesting (but probably totally unaswerable) question : how much will being on Mars change the religious people there?
Yeeeeeaaaars ago a teacher told me (dunno if he thought it up himself or not) that the judean/chrisian/muslim idea of a 'timeless' God was inspired simply by living in the desert... seeing the timeless sands and rocks, unmoved etc... influenced the people in their God image... As opposed to for instance the Celts that lived in 'green land' seeing old strange trees etc... they shaped their gods as beings in nature etc...
Going back to a desert (Think the Dune sci-fi/fantasy books) planet, where virtually all you will ever see is sand, rocks, eons and eons written in stone... Must have *some* impact on the 'soul'...

*Wow...it's been a while since I've dug back, memory-wise, into all the studying I did about comparative religion back in the 1990s...

Those are interesting points, Rik.

I recall (trying to yank all this out of my sloggish memory surrounding this stuff) that one of the major changes in religious perception occurred when certain human societies switched over (somehow) from perceiving time as cyclical to linear.

The religions based on cycles tended to be polytheistic (gods and goddesses), pagan (nature-based), etc. Many, if not most, believe in reincarnation (in some form or another). Change is key to cycles-oriented religions.

Linear perception of time ushered in monotheism (God) with life after death beliefs (perhaps a carry-over from the previous cycles-based religions) -- but simply in the context of 1 life, you die, you go to a final place of torment or pleasure. Stasis is key to linear-oriented religions.

I think my memory is serving me well enough... ::fingers crossed::

--Cindy

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-02-02 22:46:04

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#2 2004-02-03 00:19:39

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#3 2004-02-03 04:35:27

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#4 2004-02-03 06:53:50

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#5 2004-02-03 09:58:05

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#6 2004-02-03 13:58:42

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#7 2004-02-03 14:06:57

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#8 2004-02-03 14:31:16

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#9 2004-02-03 17:44:35

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#10 2004-02-03 18:01:16

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#11 2004-02-04 09:24:36

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#12 2004-02-09 01:26:33

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#13 2004-02-09 17:58:27

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#14 2004-02-10 13:46:12

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#15 2004-02-17 11:04:32

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#16 2004-02-17 21:57:47

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#17 2004-02-18 02:37:26

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#18 2004-02-18 07:44:00

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#19 2004-02-20 10:59:37

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#20 2004-02-20 11:12:53

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#21 2004-02-20 11:32:57

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#22 2004-02-20 11:49:36

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#23 2004-02-20 13:33:56

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#24 2004-02-20 15:34:36

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

#25 2004-02-20 16:22:31

Re: Should God be Exported to Mars?

Board footer