Why the global decrease in religiosity is a good thing

The Effects of Religion on Economic and Human Development

There exists an old, but timeless, anti-religion adage, “Two hands working can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer.” It is a simple message, yet one that is heatedly debated and scrutinized.  Would a society with more atheists and nonreligious people be better for human, societal and economic growth? The argument prevails over whether or not religion has a positive effect on economic and human development. Some scholars believe that religion is essential to a society because it dictates, outlines, and promotes ethical and moral beliefs and behavior along with social controls (even systems of justice). Others contend that organized religion can be the source of a multitude of negative intra and inter societal consequences. They include: restrictions on capital accumulation and profitmaking, the economic and social legal stratification and segregation of different ethnic and racial populations, and an escalation in violent conflict between holy faith groups. Today, there are only a handful of studies that attempt to gain insight on the importance of the correlation between religion and economic growth, and religion and human development. While these studies will be examined further throughout this work, they leave unanswered the argument of whether or not religion is beneficial to societal, cultural and human development. Without having an archive of statistical data providing explicit answers to the proposed question, I believe it is possible to construct provisional methods to do so. Using my methods, I argue that the benefits of a non-religious society, untethered to the restrictive tenants of fundamentalist and organized religion, outweigh those of a religious culture, and therefore is more likely to promote the positive evolution of a developing country.

Many scholars, who still believe in the necessity of organized religion to develop a prosperous society, often quote the works of economist Adam Smith and philosopher Max Weber, two scholarly voices of the 18^th and 19^th centuries. Both of these theorists offered their best arguments concerning why belief in religion was critical to success of nation building. In 1776, Adam Smith, wrote in An Enquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, that one of religion’s most important influences to the economic development process was its value as a moral enforcement mechanism (Khan and Bashar). He argued that in societies with a widespread belief in God, “the values of honesty and integrity are more prevalent, and fewer resources would be devoted to determining the reliability of an individual’s or firm’s business ethics.”  Smith’s argument that “outstanding moral principle” is crucial to economic and social success is consistent with his other significant historical ideologies. Smith’s magnum opus was his economic philosophy in which he argues for a free market ruled by an “invisible hand”, a philosophy that is contingent upon good faith, as well as consumers with a stout belief in morals. Smith asserted that religion is an expression of the need for justice and benevolence in the material world and “enforces the natural sense of duty.”  In 1904, Max Weber argued that the work ethic inspired by the Protestant Reformation helped to explain the rise of capitalism in Western Europe and America while similar growth did not occur in other parts of the world. In his book The Sociology of Religion, Weber focused on how the fear of God and Hell promotes individual and collectively social morality. For example, he visualized salvation as a key idea that drives action, noting, “Concern is essentially with the quest for salvation…insofar as it produced certain consequences for practical behavior in the world.”  Both Smith and Weber argue that individuals will be driven to achieve higher standards due to a divine power, and because religion strengthens moral aptitude, it demands hard work and other virtuous qualities.  While some scholars still cite these 18^th and 19^th century arguments as essential elements for the promotion of religion in society, religion being a requirement for “doing good” has become an increasingly outdated and irrelevant model of explanation. It seems that in the 21^st century, countries with less religious populations are actually more likely to be successful than do countries with societies driven by the tenants of organized religion.

Before analyzing the causation of why societies are better off without a heavy religious influence, it is important to examine the empirical data of religious countries and their economic strength. In 2008, the Gallup research group examined the volume of religiosity in the worlds 196 countries (Is religion an important part of your daily life?). Egypt (100%), Bangladesh (99%), Sri Lanka (99%), Indonesia(98%), Congo (98%), Sierra Leone (98%), Malawi (98%), Senegal (98%), Djibouti (98%), and Morocco (98%) all scored within Gallup’s top ten most religious countries. Meanwhile, Estonia (14%), Sweden (17%), Denmark (18%), Norway (20%), Czech Republic (21%), Azerbaijan (21%), Hong Kong (22%), Japan (25%), and France (25%) were recognized as the least religious. Gallup noticed that a population's religiosity level is strongly related to its average standard of living. “Our world poll for example,” Gallup explained, “indicates that 8 of the 11 countries in which almost all residents (at least 98%) say religion is important in their daily lives are poorer nations in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. On the opposite end of the spectrum, the 10 least religious countries studied include several with the world's highest living standards, including Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Hong Kong, and Japan.” This correlation cannot simply be by chance, or randomness.  There is a clear relationship between a country’s religiosity and development, a relationship that indicates with a more religious population, there will be a decrease in standard of living. In 1990, Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq, developed a new statistic, the Human Development Index (HDI). Haq explained, “People are the real wealth of a nation.”  He aggregated measurements of life expectancy, education, and income indices to form a general conclusion of a country’s human development. According to the official United Nations Development Program statement, HDI “is used to distinguish whether a country is  developed, developing or undeveloped, and to measure the impact of economic policies on quality of life”.  Most importantly, HDI offers a more sophisticated examination that extends beyond the individual “standard of living” factor analyzed by Gallup. Again, when comparing the HDI’s of the 10 most religious countries (identified by Gallup) against the 9 least religious, well-defined relationships are elucidated.  The 9 countries that are considered “least religious”, average an HDI rank of 23.2, out of 187 countries examined. Within this group, Norway, considered the 4^th least religious country in the world by Gallup, is the global HDI leader. The 9 countries (Bangladesh does not have a score) that are considered “most religious”, average an HDI ranking of 146.8, out of 187 countries examined. This includes, the 187^th ranked country out of 187, Congo.

Breaking down statistics in individual states within the United States can further support the correlation between high religiosity and its effect on low social and economic development. Mississippi, Alabama, South Carolina, Tennessee, Louisiana, Arkansas, Georgia, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Kentucky are the “most religious” states according to the Gallup poll. Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts, Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Rhode Island, Nevada, and Connecticut are classified as the “least religious”. While there is no Human Development Index for individual states, statistics provided by the United States Census Bureau in 2006 provide valuable indicators such as “Persons of 25 with Bachelors Degree”, “Median Household Income”, and “Infant Mortality Rate”. When comparing the indicators of the ten most religious states to the ten least religious states, there are clear discrepancies, once again.  Out of 50 American states, for percentage of “Persons of 25 and older with at least a Bachelors Degree”, the group of 10 most religious states averaged 40^th place. For “Median Household Income” they averaged 42^nd, and for “Infant Mortality Rank”, 45^th. The 10 least religious states fared much better. Averaging the totals from this group revealed that the least religious states ranked 15^th in “Persons of 25 and older with at least a Bachelors Degree”, 14^th in “Median Household Income”, and 15^th in “Infant Mortality Rank”.

            Certain research has defined the correlation between religion and its effects on human and economic development; the more religious a population, the less likely it will experience significant development, the less religious population, the more likely it will experience significant development. On the surface, there are seemingly several arguments to explain this phenomenon. According to Rachel M. McClearly of Stanford University,  “The more educated a person is the more likely he is to turn to science for explanations of natural phenomena, with religion intended to explain supernatural phenomena and psychological phenomena for which there is no rational explanation.” This suggests that higher levels of education translate to less religious people. U.S politician Robert G. Ingersol once said, “As people become more intelligent they care less for preachers and more for teachers.” Data supports the claim. Examining the research of individual states we can use the statistic, “Persons of 25 and older with at least a Bachelors Degree”, to be a solid indicator for education levels in a population. According to U.S Census Bureau, the most religious states ranked near the bottom of most educated states and the least religious states ranked near the top. On the global scale, a third of the dimensions used to obtain the Human Development Index are associated with education. To achieve a high HDI score, it is essential for a high level of education. The value of having advanced education is seemingly unparalleled. A more highly educated society produces scientists, physicians, engineers, politicians, and artists all capable of helping improve daily life.

Another factor likely contributing to the negative correlation between religion and development is individual satisfaction with the status quo. German philosopher Karl Marx famously called religion “the opiate of the masses”. Marx argued that religion was like opium; it only provided the temporary relief for pain, and in doing so made suffering bearable, thus worsening the human condition by “removing the impetus do doing whatever is necessary to overcome it." Marxist philosophy contends that a religious system inhibits human capabilities and places a limit on what an individual could accomplish. Societies dominated by religious beliefs seriously interfere with human advancement and growth. And, if society believes in the religious tenants of actions being “gods will”, it could assist those in positions of power by offering divine justification for the status quo or brutal social and humanitarian policy. Seneca, an ancient roman philosopher similarly argued, “Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful”.

Less religiosity in a country inhibits civil wars being fought between factions of holy groups and thus prevents what Paul Collier, author of the Bottom Billion, defines as the “conflict trap”. There have been multiple examples of civil wars being fought citing religious differences.  In Northern Ireland, civil unrest lasted about three decades, largely between the Roman Catholics nationalist community and the primarily Protestant unionist community resulting in 3,500 deaths. Current conflicts and wars in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Ivory Coast, Cyprus, East Timor, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Macedonia, Nigeria, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan. Thailand, Tibet, and Uganda have all been cited to have religious intolerance as part of the tension. All these countries, many of them included in Collier’s book “The Bottom Billion” are subject to the “conflict trap”. Of all the traps that Collier defines, the “conflict trap” is particularly devastating. Religious and ethnic tension was so prevalent that in 1999, religious leaders met in Geneva, Switzerland and signed “The Geneva Spiritual Appeal”. The document asked for political and religious leaders and organizations to ensure that religious faiths were not used to justify future violence. When the document was written, the delegates claimed, “56 current conflicts, civil disturbances, wars, etc. have significant religious elements.” In addition to Civil wars and internal conflicts, millions of people have been systematically exterminated in the name of religion through holocausts, genocides, terrorist attacks and ethnic cleansings.

One of the more interesting aspects of the argument about religion and its effects on development is that there seems to be no consensus answer. Many scholars continue to argue the virtues of religion as essential to development while other theorists contend that religion not only stunts societal growth but may be the lead cause of irreparable social harm and damage.  

Our technological sophisticated and interconnected world provides the opportunity to conduct more complex research capable of identifying multivariable statistical analyses to calculate the true value of religious influence on various societies differing in global location, environmental conditions, government control and policy, socio-economic, racial and ethnic stratification, health and wellness, and criminal behavior and justice. Additionally, because the practice of religious belief is, after all a very human experience, and essential method in the evaluation of its effectiveness is through asking direct questions of individuals living different societies. One of the more important questions being, “how has religion affected your life?” Through this comprehensive examination and statistical analysis, social scientists will better understand more precisely how religion is contributing to certain economic and social development. Countries located in Sub-Saharan Africa, experience religion as the most central part of their societal structure. Among the questions to be answered would be; god fearing or principle builder, political control and oppression or the enhancement of social wellbeing and prosperity, poverty, disease, and starvation, or work and nutrition.      

There is a compelling argument in favor of developing countries pursuing science and secular education rather than the promotion of religion. Current research seems to indicate that the most developed, progressive countries are the least religious. These countries are not religion dominant. Instead, they share the value of promoting human prosperity through the prioritization of education, economic development, health and disease control, and social and religious freedoms.  The countries with populations that seem to rely less on religion and value individual and social equality together with the pursuit of education score the highest on all statistical indicators. It is expected that more sophisticated research and statistical analyses will further enhance the validity and relevance of this argument.