Will Civs that don't research religion get a science bonus?

Sounds good.
Perhaps it should be an Atheism-"religion"(On discovery of Scientific Method, perhaps?), which let you get a %-boost to science, but caused you to lose the happiness effects of religious buildings.
It would help to simulate the modern world better - I don't think religions are keeping as many people "content" in the western world today as it did in the past.
 
Why? The Arabs were a great religious scientific civilisation in the medieval period. The Christian church has sponsored great scientific advances. It is only in the modern age, where church and state are separate in the most scientifically advanced nation (USA) that lack of religion (in the state, not amongst the people) might seem to have such an effect.

And after all, if you don't research religion at all, you save yourself the trouble of researching that tech, freeing up time to research other stuff.
 
I'd say that the science bonus for a non-religious civ should not come until late game. I don't know of any highly scientific, non-religious civilizations before the modern era.
 
There won't be any non-religious civs in the late game. Or will there? Japan is very religious yet it is still progressing scientifically. Megabrainz hit the nail on the head: If you don't want to research a religious tech research a economic or military one. :)
 
Sounds awful... no offence. I'm no Christian but that northern Europe became part of Western civilisation is largely through the efforts of the medieval Church.
 
Well you do get a science bonus with Freedom of Religion (encouraging people to try and convince each other without killing each other)

Also just because you don't research a religion doesn't mean you won't get it (all that needs to happen is that someone somewhere researches the religion first, then it appears there and spreads)... So just because you research Monotheism doesn't mean your cities will ever be Jewish, because someone else on another continent may have gotten it first, which means you will have to wait for them to bring the Torah to you. On the other hand someone on the other end of This continent may have researhed Code of Laws first, and Confucianism will slowly spread from one civ to another until it reaches your cities.... Even though you haven't gotten Code of Laws yet.
 
I think megabrainz has got it right. Only the vocal minority of religious folks today have problems with science, and then usuaully only concerning evolution. I know many people with masters/Ph.D's in hard sciences (physics, engineering) that don't believe in evolution.
 
megabrainz said:
And after all, if you don't research religion at all, you save yourself the trouble of researching that tech, freeing up time to research other stuff.

Wait I think not having a religion is not an option in Civ IV. The only option is to not FOUND a religion and get a holy city. I think if other civs found religions then your civ will have those religions from missionaries.

Is there any other advantage besides not having to research the tech to not founding a religion ever?

It seems like probably at least half the techs would be ones you want to research anyway.
 
cierdan said:
Wait I think not having a religion is not an option in Civ IV. The only option is to not FOUND a religion and get a holy city. I think if other civs found religions then your civ will have those religions from missionaries.

Well, you never have to change your state religion from paganism, and you can always try to kill the missionaries they send. Or closed borders, or something.

But really, stop being such elitist atheists and accept religion for the cultural tool that it is. After all, no one says you have to believe anything- it's the mass of the people that are being led around by the nose.
 
I think it works best how it currently is.

Civ "A" builds a Temple, while Civ "B" builds a Library. Civ "A" uses religious strategies that grant Great Prophets, while Civ "B" uses scientific strategies that grant Great Scientists.

No need to change anything.
 
tristangreer said:
I'd say that the science bonus for a non-religious civ should not come until late game. I don't know of any highly scientific, non-religious civilizations before the modern era.

Just wondering - how many non-religious civilizations were there before the modern era? Not being sarcastic am interested in knowing. (also not interested in doing the research lol).
 
elderotter said:
Just wondering - how many non-religious civilizations were there before the modern era? Not being sarcastic am interested in knowing. (also not interested in doing the research lol).

Depends on what you mean by non-religious
 
elderotter said:
Just wondering - how many non-religious civilizations were there before the modern era? Not being sarcastic am interested in knowing. (also not interested in doing the research lol).

The first completely atheistic state was the French Revolution. But even they started a cult worshipping the "Goddess of Reason" after a few years.

The first "freedom of religion" country was the United States.

Religion is just a natural part of humanity. True it has it's excesses, but overall it's more good than bad. It's not as if atheist states have a clean record either, as can be seen in Soviet Russia, Maoist China, etc.

Evil humans use whatever excuses they can to justify their evil actions- if it's not religion than it's political ideology or race.
 
As I recall, the Byzantine Empire, specifically in Constantinople was very cosmopolitan during much of it's existence, especially before the Turks showed up. Muslims, Christians and Jews living together, oh my!

You might call them one of the first "freedom of religion" states. At least before all the wars started.
 
The Abbasids were also very kind and did not forcefully convert Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians. Therefore, concerning World-Religions, they had "Freedom of Religion" before the Byzantines. On the other hand, there was a tax placed upon non-Muslim households.

EDIT: Or Alexander's Hellenistic Empire: Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and Greeks living together. Some say however, that if Alexander didn't die the whole world would be practicing Buddhism today.
 
I wouldn't exactly call putting a tax on other religions "freedom". But yes, there are examples of people living together in relative peace before the modern world. None of those civilizations survived the test of time, but some were Great.
 
CdGGambit said:
I wouldn't exactly call putting a tax on other religions "freedom". But yes, there are examples of people living together in relative peace before the modern world. None of those civilizations survived the test of time, but some were Great.

Yeah, I would likely call that Organized Religion, or Pacifism (Theocracy is the one that gets the anti-other religions bonus)

I think the main idea with Freedom of Religion is the lack of an official religion (which many European countries still have even if the people are very non-religious)

I'm beginning to come around to the idea that Freedom of Religion may work for societies like the USSR and China where they weren't free, but a Police State+Bureaucracy/Nationalism+Freedom of Religion definitely would be very different than Universal Suffrage/Representation+Freedom of Speech+Freedom of Religion. and those Government and Law Categories could be what represents the real difference (Freedom of Religion in the USSR/China meaning all non-state groups are equally oppressed and there is no state religion)
 
CdGGambit said:
I know many people with masters/Ph.D's in hard sciences (physics, engineering) that don't believe in evolution.

And that is their choice. However, physics and engineering has very little do to with biology and the theory of evolution :P.

While science usually conquers religion, it isn't necessarily the other way around. It would only be so in the most extreme cases that religion stunts scientific growth.
 
Back
Top Bottom