Teapots&unicorns writes:
So, what if we found intelligent life and they had no christianity, judaism, islam, etc. or no religion/god(s) at all?
Well, that does beg the question of what constitutes or defines "intelligent" life. We could take a simple-minded approach and say that "intelligent life" would be any sort of entity that would be capable of communicating with us in some manner that involves a propositional logic or grammar. (Do keep in mind: if there is no basis for communication, it might be because we humans would be too stupid to get it.)
Obviously, if there is no method of communication in terms of statements, questions, etc, there would be no basis for determining whether this other sort of entity has anything resembling a "material/non-material" or "natural/supernatural" dichotomy, let alone what kinds of notions it would have (if any) about non-material, supernatural "things".
Now, there are methods of "communication" that do not involve propositional logic or grammar: predation or other forms of belligerence, avoidance or other forms of shyness/cowardice, and various behaviors and "accessories" (tools and whatnot) that would lead us to infer the level of intelligence of this other sort of entity (and would lead them to infer ours). But in the absence of symbolic and propositional "dialog", it would be hard to imagine how we would infer anything about beliefs involving non-material/supernatural stuff.
Anyway, let's suppose that communication succeeds, and we somehow get to the topic of theology... (... sorry, but I couldn't help giggling ...) Supposing they had none whatsoever, I don't see that as having any effect on the subset of humans that are devoutly religious. It's just another life form that happens to exist outside the community of God's Chosen -- no big deal.
But OTOH, if they just happen to come out with a Bible that is, astonishingly, very much like our own, well, I think we'll have a serious problem on our hands. Each Bible would be designating a particular group as "God's Chosen" -- but then that would mean either that both Bibles are wrong, or that exactly one of them is wrong, because how could they both be right?
The possible outcomes for that scenario are (a) atheism is adopted by one or both sides, (b) violent conflict ensues until one or the other is subdued or obliterated, or (c) both sides somehow manage to turn around, go away and never meet each other again, because maybe the universe is big enough for both to coexist without violent conflict (this might have to happen in combination with (a), if only one side were switching to atheism).
There might be another alternative, whereby one or both sides somehow manage to "reinterpret" their respective sacred texts, in a way that somehow makes them sufficiently "compatible" so that God's Word somehow includes both sides in an all-encompassing "wholeness". But that would require some pretty drastic reinterpretation on our side, for sure.
Or maybe it would just be time for another new portion of the book -- I mean, this sort of thing has been done before, right? Old Testament, New Testament, Totally New Testament -- why not? (And I gather that many people would put the Book of Mormon in there as well, giving us yet another precedent.)
Come to think of it, I wouldn't be surprised if our side or "their side" (or both?) ended up being viewed by the other as being more tightly bound or linked to the supernatural (whether for good or evil), which would probably lead both sides to adopt considerable reinterpretation of their respective scriptures.
I could go on about how the outcome would depend on the two sides' respective assessments of their relative intelligence (and power, and abilities, and predictability of behavior, etc), regardless of whether or not there is symbolic, propositional communication. But that's pretty obvious. With regard to cases where there might be a big difference between sides, we need only look at our own interactions, whether with other species on this planet (other primates, whales, domesticates), or between vastly divergent cultures (19th century Europeans meeting Native Americans, 20th century anthropologists meeting various pre-technical tribal groups, etc). It's actually quite a mixed bag where anything could happen.
autotelic adj. (of an entity or event) having within itself the purpose of its existence or happening.
™ Version 4.2
