• Jorgelino@lemmy.ml
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      We wouldn’t call a quark a quark but we’d still know that quarks exist and what they are. My point is aside from some simple ideas that are simply too basic to not think of, religions would still be fundamentally different.

        • Jorgelino@lemmy.ml
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Perhaps i’m putting religion through a higher scrutiny here, but that’s because we’re comparing two things with a very different level for complexity here.

          The idea that there’s some invisible force that makes things you don’t understand happen, or that we should love and respect eachother, or even more specific ones like “we shouldn’t eat so and so food” or “we should dress in x or y way” are still simple enough that anyone could come up with at any point in their lives with little effort. All that remains is a game of chance of how similar the combination of these ideas is to the religions we had previously.

          With science, it gets much more complex, each field of science, or even each concept within that field, required way more effort to learn, and goes much more indepth than anything religion can provide.

          So while i’d consider humanity rediscovering even basic arithmetic to be most certainly more than just chance, forgive me for thinking people eventually coming up with a religion that uses a cross as a symbol isn’t enough to say that that is christianity reborn.

            • Jorgelino@lemmy.ml
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              That’s all very interesting, but i’m not sure what you’re trying to get at. I’ve already agreed that certain ideas are simple enough that they’re very likely to be thought of again, but is that enough to say that “so and so religion has re-appeared”? How close to their original counterparts do they have to be for you to consider them to be essentially the same?

              Because i’m fairly certain that save for minor discrepancies in areas that are more subjective, every field of science could re-emerge and get to the same state it’s in now simply by studying the world around us. And i don’t think the same can be said of religion. Do you genuinely believe that near perfect counterparts for all current religions would be formed again? Or at least to the same level that science could?