The human need to make sense of the world
Humans are perhaps the only species that needs to make sense of the world around them. Having developed the capacity for self-reflection and reasoning, people started to wonder about their place in the world and the universe, seeking explanations to give meaning to their lives. It must be emphasised from the start that such questions do not only relate to physical or empirical reality but are also metaphysical in nature, and involve a search for meaning, not just explanation. How humans interpret and act in the world is influenced not just by their capacity to reason (located in the frontal cortex), but also by interaction with feelings and emotions, the source of which is deeply rooted in the brain’s limbic system. Making sense of the world around them can be considered a basic human need that, if unfulfilled, can lead to an existential crisis. What’s the meaning of life? Why am I/are we here? Who am I? Is there a higher power or God? These are questions that people can’t avoid asking and seeking answers to. They are intrinsic to human nature. But answering them in different ways is inherent to the human condition.
A brief history of beliefs
Throughout human history, societies have developed their own accounts of the creation of the world, its origins, and the meaning of life. Although it is possible to find common elements or themes in many of these stories, societies have tended to attach greater merit to their own than to those of others. Having developed distinct values, norms, and rules from their belief systems, they often regarded those of others as wrong, objectionable, or even offensive. Non-believers and offenders have commonly been treated harshly, oppressed, forced to mend their ways, or killed. Where belief systems intersect with culture, diversity often gives rise to social tensions and conflict, thereby complicating social integration. However, forcing social integration by imposing belief systems on non-believers invariably provokes resentment, hatred, and hostility, feeding conflict and disintegration. Unsurprisingly, addressing the diversity of belief systems, especially when they overlap with cultural, racial, economic, and political differences, has posed an enduring challenge for many societies and the world. And arguably, this will remain so unless humanity is indoctrinated with the same beliefs, which seems unlikely but is perhaps increasingly possible.
Here, I will briefly discuss various ways people have (tried to) make sense of the world, many of which continue to attract support and are still relevant to this challenge. The most common approach throughout human history has been to accept and adhere to traditional belief systems. From the earliest times, people have sought to make sense of what was happening to and around them by seeking explanations and meaning in the natural world. Groups, tribes, and societies simply followed the traditional beliefs that had been passed down to them. Animistic belief systems assign meaning to animals, trees, plants, water, mountains, thunder, lightning, and other natural phenomena. The natural world was full of gods or spirits, some of whom were ancestors, often consulted for guidance on appropriate actions and behaviour. Once-predominant animistic belief systems persist among indigenous peoples, although elements such as spiritualism and superstition continue to attract adherents in modern societies.
Animistic or pagan belief systems took a significant hit when monotheistic belief systems, including Christianity and Islam, that insisted that there was only one God who had to be worshipped and obeyed, became dominant. What humans were allowed to believe and do, and what they were forbidden to believe and do, was determined by religious leaders. On the one hand, under monotheism, making sense of the world was easy – people did not have to figure it out for themselves, and what they believed was drilled into them from a very young age. On the other hand, if or when they developed doubts about what they were being taught, they ended up having a very tough time being persecuted and tortured, banished or put to death at the stake. At the same time, monotheistic religions contributed to spreading intolerance, conflict and wars, as non-believers or other believers had to be converted to the one and only true religion.
A role for philosophy
Trying to make sense of the world lies at the heart of philosophy, which has been defined as “the study of general and fundamental problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language.” Initially, as practised by ancient philosophers, philosophy implied the pursuit of integral knowledge and understanding (or wisdom), premised on the interconnectedness of everything. Philosophers have traditionally sought to discover the essence of, and the connections between, things through questioning, reflection, the application of logic, and the synthesis of knowledge from observation, experience, and study. Perhaps inevitably, over time, philosophy became more preoccupied with knowledge rather than meaning or wisdom. With the development of science and specialisation, which has reached unprecedented levels in modern times, philosophy has also fragmented into a range of branches, including the philosophy of science, religion, political philosophy, and metaphysics, each with its own sub-branches and specialisations, numerous schools of thought, and diverse individual perspectives. Philosophers have long struggled to have their views adopted by society. This is even more so in modern societies, where mainly non-philosophers are involved in a battle for the hearts and minds. However, although philosophy is no longer considered the “queen” of all knowledge or the primary fount of wisdom, it still plays a crucial role. In a world where influencing and manipulating the public (views, opinions, behaviour, preferences) has become a preoccupation of the media, PR industry, businesses, and governments, “Who and what to believe?” has become an increasingly compelling question. Philosophers can help societies by rigorously scrutinising prevailing and competing beliefs and ideas, as well as their underlying assumptions.
A role for history
History can be defined as an effort to make sense of the past to understand the present. Historians offer written accounts of what happened in the past, often based on many different sources and an interpretation of the (relative) significance of facts, events, developments and what has caused them. In its most ambitious form, history synthesises information, evidence, and insights from a range of disciplines, weaving them into a plausible narrative about how and why “we” (a country, locality, group, or the world as a whole) arrived at our current state or position. Given the enormous scope for interpreting the past differently and the central role of creativity and value judgements in putting together a plausible or convincing story, history is an art rather than a science. Well done, history can be the most fascinating and insightful way of making sense of the world, transcending the sometimes narrow and blinkered accounts of belief systems, philosophies, or science. That does not mean that history is, or can be, objective. Interpretation inevitably involves evaluation and scope for subjectivity or even bias. However, the strengths of good history are that it sketches a comprehensive or whole picture of (a stage in) reality rather than reducing it to fragments, and it does so in a way that makes it accessible and perhaps even meaningful to non-specialists.
The role of science
With the advent of the Enlightenment and the rediscovery and growth of the belief that it was desirable and possible for humans to learn about how the world works through the application of reason (logic) and empirical science, religious belief systems, notably in the West, gradually lost much of their grip over human interpretations of reality. Increasingly, a line was drawn between efforts to understand and explain what was happening in the natural and human worlds (societies) through the natural and social sciences, on the one hand, and the assignment of meaning to human existence and the cosmos, on the other. While some religious believers continued to hold onto more or less dogmatic interpretations of how the world works, and some scientists rejected the need for religion altogether, religions continued to attract mass followings, as many people rightly thought that science had little to offer in terms of ethical guidance. Scientists can be very good at explaining some aspects of how the physical or natural world works. However, they can’t say what this should mean for human thinking about what is right or wrong, what is essential to people and societies, and what they should do or aspire to. In this normative field, human belief systems—both religious and secular—continue to play a crucial role. Belief (including value) systems also influence or shape what scientists do, contrary to the claim of scientific objectivity. Science, including social science, is always based on premises, assumptions, and choices influenced by contextual factors and values. This does not mean that all scientists are biased in the sense of deliberately selecting, distorting and interpreting research to support pre-determined outcomes. Some are. However, most scientists maintain the pretence that their research is objective and value-free, primarily to preserve their scientific reputations. Many do not even (want to) think about their research’s social, economic, political, environmental, moral and ethical implications, even though no research is exempt from these.
A role for ideology
The fact that human interpretations of how the world works inevitably comprise empirical and normative components is inherent to the concept of ideology. Ideology comprises a set of ideas about how society (or the world) is structured and functions, and how, from the perspective of a particular class or group, society or the world should be structured and function. Ideas on the latter front may simply endorse the interpretation of the existing social order (i.e., be conservative), or advocate radical structural change grounded in values that regard the existing social order and political system as unacceptable.
Although broadly speaking, religions are also ideologies, the era of the formation of modern secular ideologies and their competition began in the 18th century with the rise of classical liberalism and the emergence of the notion of popular sovereignty. From around the mid-19th century, Marxist (or socialist and communist) ideology began gaining strong popular support in many European countries. It seriously threatened the existing political-economic order based on capitalism and a mix of liberal and conservative ideologies. The ideological and political battles were further sharpened by the Russian Revolution, the rise of fascism in the 1930s and 1940s, and the Cold War between capitalism and socialism, which struggled for global supremacy after World War II. Eventually, the battle between capitalism and socialism softened with the emergence and coming to power of social democracy as an ideology that accepted co-responsibility for managing capitalism. The ultimate end of ideological struggle, foreshadowed by some social scientists, was proclaimed by analysts at the end of the 1980s, following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Liberal democracy was deemed to have won the ideological battle between capitalism (in its neoliberal form) and, on the other hand, communism and socialism. From then on, the argument goes, there is only one valid way to look at how the world works and should work. There is no alternative.
Notwithstanding these developments, ideology has far from disappeared. Even though neoliberal capitalism and liberal democracy still dominate the world, they are not the only ideologies that people in the world adhere to. Despite the collapse of socialist systems (but not all), the ideological battles are far from over. Large cracks have begun to appear in the hegemony of neoliberal ideology, yet its principal proponents remain committed to it. Regardless of what the ruling classes want us to think, there are other ways of interpreting what is happening in the world and judging what is desirable and possible. The growth of inequality, poverty and corruption, also in high-income countries, continuing financial instability and economic insecurity (lack of job security and unemployment), growing social tensions around immigration and national identity, the COVID-19 pandemic, and mounting environmental pressures have fuelled a decline in the level of trust in politicians and the legitimacy of existing political systems. While at this stage no other ideology has emerged that enjoys majority support worldwide, there are worrying signs that the belief in the value of democracy is waning and that public support for extreme-right ideologies and authoritarian forms of government is growing. Tensions and conflicts based on religious and ethnic differences, fed or aggravated by political-economic factors and political manipulation, have increased. Nationalism, despite or because of globalisation, remains an essential source of identity, often exploited for (geo-)political purposes.
Placing the environment
How people look at the world not only affects how they interact with each other but also how they impact the biophysical environment. As noted above, from an animistic worldview, humans and nature are spiritually interconnected; therefore, humans are required to treat nature with respect. Although this did not mean that animistic (and indigenous) societies always lived in harmony with nature and did not cause environmental harm, their impact was significantly lower and more localised than that of modern societies. Larger populations, technological development, and higher levels of production and consumption are all proximate causes of the mounting environmental pressures and problems. However, behind these lies a complex interplay of systemic socio-cultural and political-economic factors that have driven production and consumption, population growth, and technological innovation, often without consideration for environmental impacts. These factors have also shaped the dominant worldviews, including views of nature and the environment. Putting humans at the centre of concern, above and separate from (the rest of) nature, the environment was, and still is, treated foremost as a pool of (limitless) resources to be exploited for human ends. Around the world, the dominant religious and secular belief systems continue to largely ignore the fundamental role and importance of the environment in sustaining life on Earth, treating nature as something that can and must be controlled or even superseded by humans.
Conclusion
Despite claims that the era of ideology is over, battles for the hearts and minds are as important as ever. How people view the world is no longer primarily influenced by tradition, but also by those who have accumulated cognitive power, notably through control over the mass media. Differences in belief systems continue to play a crucial role in all societal issues. Whether and how these battles change humans’ dominant views of themselves, nature, and the universe will likely determine humanity’s fate.