Christianity Cannot Be a Religion for Modern Society


Christianity Cannot Be a Religion for Modern Society
              Being a Christian may be beneficial to an individual because he can talk to God, his life becomes easier, he can die with more ease, etc. We need to note that these benefits accrue to an individual. Game theory teaches that individual benefits are not necessarily consistent with social benefits. In other words, pursuit of individual benefits can make all people worse off. This mechanism is called the prisoner’s dilemma. Individual rationality does not necessarily mean social rationality, contrary to the individualistic philosophy of Western society.
              Religious wars are an example of the prisoner’s dilemma here. People involved think that they are right and that their enemy is wrong. They may even think that their enemy must be eliminated because of wrong belief. Religious wars are fought in this way. These states are very likely to be worse than those without wars.
              Consider Christianity from this viewpoint. It is an extremely exclusive religion in the sense that it even allows Christians to kill non-Christians. Today this tendency is pronounced especially among US Christians. If some non-Christians seriously fight back, the earth will face chaos.
Psychological wars are no less important. The state of mixture of people of different religions including Christianity is actually a psychological war in which hatred, distrust, and discrimination prevail. Such a state is not efficient in the economics sense: communication is not smooth, cooperation is difficult, and society is unsafe.
              How should a religion for modern society be? My idea is the following: Consider the group of people who practice a particular religion. Call them R and the rest of the people NR. This religion satisfies a condition for modern society if it makes both R and NR happy. This can happen if the religion is not exclusive. For example, R may be religious enough to help NR. Seeing the behavior of R, some of NR may join R.
Unfortunately, Christianity does not satisfy the above condition. I would like to add that there are various ways to derive benefits similar to those mentioned at the beginning.

Comments and questions are welcome.
kazuhiro.arai888@gmail.com

Kazuhiro Arai’s English twitter:       　https://twitter.com/araikazuhiroe88
Kazuhiro Arai’s Japanese twitter:　     https://twitter.com/araikazuhiro88
Kazuhiro Arai’s Japanese blog:         https://araikazuhiro.blogspot.jp/
Kazuhiro Arai’s Japanese home page:   http://araikazuhiro.world.coocan.jp/





Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Nature of Economics (7)

Image
The Nature of Economics (7) Neoclassical economics does not consider efficiency of the whole economy because the production function and utility function are exogenously given. Since I do not think that this point is made clear in books or papers, I would like to discuss it in some detail. Consider two economies E1 and E2. The workers in E1 are more cooperative and hard-working. Those in E2 are selfish and lazy. Hence, the labor productivity in the firm in E1 is higher for equally given levels of physical inputs. However both economies are efficient in neoclassical economics! Both E1 and E2 are efficient as far as all firms maximize their profits subject to exogenously given (different) production functions! It is obvious that E1 is more affluent than E2. I would like to emphasize that efficiency differs from affluence in neoclassical economics. Next consider two economies E3 and E4. The people in E3 are more harmonious and other-regarding within the household. Those in E4 ar...
Read more

The Nature of Economics (5)

Image
The Nature of Economics (5) We see here a good example for the fact that the values researchers possess affect their choice of the topic and method of research generating bias in ‘scientific works.’ 　 Researchers who want to support individualism do not analyze firms or households seriously. They simply introduce exogenously given production functions and utility functions. Economists tend to ignore or distort social aspects that are inconvenient to build models with conclusions they like. It is really hard to establish social sciences that are value-free. Researchers need to recognize this. On the other hand, a unified theoretical model may be formed to explain the cultural difference mentioned in the example given in the above third reason. It may be done by introducing a measure of the degree of cooperativeness as an exogenous variable. In such a model different types of equilibrium may arise for different values of the measure. If we can endogenize the variable for that m...
Read more

7/11/2017 Why Japanese people are poor speakers of English

Image
              I think Japanese people are the poorest speakers of English in the world. There are several reasons for the poor ability. The first is that Japanese and English are completely different languages. The word orders of the two languages are almost opposite. For example, an object is placed before the corresponding verb in Japanese. The second is that there are virtually no etymological similarities between the words of the two languages. * Hence, it is hard for Japanese to memorize English words. The third is that few Japanese people have necessity for English speaking ability. Most university students can learn their specialized fields using Japanese textbooks only. Almost all businessmen work speaking Japanese. The fourth is that Japanese people rarely have opportunities to practice English. There are many Japanese who are interested in English and would like to speak it. However, an average Japanese does not have even one chance ...
Read more