I have posted a few resources for mental health here, and I hope they are useful to you guys. Part of the reason those are there is because religious trauma is real, and it affects many people. Religion is not a monolith. It’s a messy grey area with lots of nuance, and a lot of it can be quite terrible. But this reminded me of a topic I think about a lot.

We in the modern West tend to feel that Secularism has been a step forward in terms of human development. We have freed ourselves from the shackles of the Church and superstition, and have embraced science. The liberal narrative of Secularism is that science, capitalism, democracy, and reason will progressively improve people’s lives, and will replace the need for religion and spirituality at some point, where no one will be religious or superstitious.

I reject that notion. I think the idea that Secularism is identical to progress is a societal myth, nothing more. Below are some reasons why I think that:

1. To believe that religion is a net negative in terms of contribution to well-being, while also believing that there can be ethical capitalism* (edited) is hypocritical, in my opinion. Yes, religious institutions have been tools of social control. So are large corporations, lobby groups, social media algorithms, etc. If you think that religion is the root of all evil, you’ll have to jump through hoops to show how these major corporations, unregulated tech giants, and algorithmic control of the masses stem from religion.
2. Science is not teleological, and it does not owe humanity a better future. Science is a social web of knowledge, institutions, and people. These institutions and people have agendas, funding obligations, and are subject to biases. If you’re going to say that religion is holding people back and science is the way forward, you’ll then have to explain why there’s so much money going into engineering and manufacturing AI surveillance tools and automated weapons that can be flown and operated from a thousand miles away. Is oppression and imperialism okay, as long as it’s carried out by secular armies? Science is a complex system, not a monolith. flattening history to a simple dichotomy of “religion bad, science good” dismisses nuance and leaves no room for critical thought.
3. Secularism tends to center Western history, and can serve as a cover for colonial narratives. Promoting “secular democracies” abroad almost always involves neoliberal reforms that benefit western nations and drain resources / labor from the global south. Secularism as a narrative always places colonized people as “superstitious” and “primitive”, even when their spirituality and religious traditions tie them to their land and shape their stewardship of it. Just because extractivism doesn’t carry a cross doesn’t mean that pillaging the land and displacing populations is any less bad. AI data centers sucking up water reserves from indigenous land is just as bad as Christians pillaging it.
4. People are not rational by default under secular structures, and superstition is not limited to ghosts and demons. Entire groups of tech venture capitalists are creating cult-like attitudes to AI and technology that are just as crazy and dangerous as apocalyptic Christian Zionism. Surprising amounts of people are suffering from AI-induced psychosis, and there’s people that truly believe that Artificial Intelligence is a God-like entity. Cults of personality around trans-humanism and fascistic tech billionaires threaten our democracy just as much as much as religious fundamentalism.

Secularism is a modern narrative, but a narrative nonetheless. It’s a myth, a story that we tell ourselves to find a direction for society and civilization. What does that narrative promote, and what does it ignore? What nuance is there that isn’t shown within the story? Can life be more complex than just stories we tell ourselves? Who’s telling the narrative and what do they gain from it? Can we summarize history into just the dialectic between “superstition” and “reason” without having to trim a lot of important details?

I think a lot of the flak we give to religion and spirituality can be thrown at secular projects for the same reasons. Generally, I think in the following manner:

• Criticize institutional structures without personal preference. The Catholic Church is guilty of a lot of abuse and protecting the abusers, but so are a lot of universities, hospitals, and corporations. Once we see that the same dangerous behavior is present in both religious and secular institutions alike, we can begin to see the real problem without ideological bias.
• Recognize historical nuance. Nothing is a monolith. Science can be a miracle, but also a curse. Religion can be enlightening, but also a manacle. Learn to see context in different situations. The science you demonize can find cures for diseases once thought terminal. The religion you vilify can guide people to dedicate their lives to justice.
• Learn epistemic humility. Scientific knowledge is not the only way to know the world. There’s intuitive, aesthetic, and participatory knowledge just to name a few. Each of these know the world from different perspectives. Don’t let one kind of knowledge monopolize all of it. That’s an easy way to dumb down your mind.

Spirituality is a grey area, and I will write more about it. But I have to cook some dinner now and cut this post short. Let me know what you think in the comments. I will follow up with a Part 2 soon.