Re: virus: playing safe with supernaturalism

Paul Prestopnik (pjp66259@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu)
Mon, 15 Jun 1998 13:34:06 -0400


JakePrime@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 98-06-12 16:59:05 EDT, you write:
>
> >> I agree that religion may very well become a memetic dead end. I do think
> that it has evolved well over the years, but that the environment will change
> too rapidly. Looking at society from 40 years ago, religion was probably
> evolved near to it's utmost virulence. <<
>
> What is it about 40 years ago that makes you say this? Perhaps from the point
> of view of a western secularist in America this might appear to be true, but I
> am curious to hear why. I think that there is the possibility of other
> religious waves that have yet to break into our cultural matrix, and that we
> have a tendency to ignore.

I have to admit I was not alive 40 years ago, and I never really studied 1950's
history. My observation was based almost entirely upon cultural artifacts from
that time period. Looking back on my post, it seems that during 1600's and 1700's
religion was more common and had a greater influence in culture. I still think
that in America, Europe, and Japan, througout most modern history there has been a
general decline in the %of religious people, and in the level of there devotion.
I haven't done any research, and I'm not peer reviewed, it's just from the general
knowledge I've gained.

When Islam begins to wane world-wide, I may begin to believe that we have

> passed the most virulent phases of religious fervor. Until that happens I
> couldn't imagine that religion is finished with the world, and ready to take a
> backseat to secularism. Christianity may be thrashing its way toward decline,
> but it may have served to pave the way for the newest world religion.

I don't know much about Islam, although I am interested.

-Paul Prestopnik