Bitcoin is a Religion
A philosophical argument for why Bitcoin maximalism is a religious movement
TLDR: In lieu of a specific definition for a religious movement, nine characteristic features of a religion are identified. It is demonstrated that seven of these features are observed in the Bitcoin maximalist community. Several additional similarities are also highlighted between the maximalist community and traditional religious movements. When taken together, it is argued that all of these characteristic features and parallels are sufficient to justifiably describe Bitcoin as a religion.
Despite being a core component of human society for millennia, philosophers and social scientists of religion have thus far been unable to provide an agreed upon definition for what constitutes a “religion” (Borowik, 2011; Bruce, 2011; Oppy, 2018; Willander, 2014, p. 31; Woodhead, 2011). To see this, consider the following list of definitions:
‘A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices related to sacred things’ (Durkheim, 1995, p. 44).
‘Religion is a system of symbols which acts to establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic.’ (Geertz and Banton, 1966, p. 90)
‘Religion is an important and unique human adaptation defined by four recurrent traits: belief systems incorporating supernatural agents and counterintuitive concepts, communal ritual, separation of the sacred and the profane, and adolescence as a preferred developmental period for religious transmission’ (Alcorta and Sosis, 2005, p. 348)
‘Religion in a given society will be that instituted process of interaction among the members of that society — and between them and the universe at large as they conceive it to be constituted — which provides them with meaning, coherence, direction, unity, easement, and whatever degree of control over events they perceive as possible’ (Klass, 1995, p. 38)
‘Religions [are] human organisations primarily engaged in providing general compensators based on supernatural assumptions. [… Where] a compensator is the belief that a reward will be obtained in the distant future or in some other context which cannot be immediately verified’ (Stark and Bainbridge, 1985, pp. 6–8)
‘Religion is a system of beliefs and practices by means of which a group of people struggles with [… the] ultimate problems of human life’ (Yinger, 1957, p. 9)
‘Religion may be defined as a system of beliefs and practices observed by a community, supported by rituals that acknowledge, worship, communicate with, or approach the Sacred, the Divine, God (in Western cultures), or Ultimate Truth, Reality, or nirvana (in Eastern cultures)’ (Koenig, 2008, p. 11)
‘Religions consists of beliefs, actions and institutions which assume the existence of supernatural entities with powers of action, or impersonal powers or processes possessed of moral purpose’ (Bruce, 2011, p. 112)
‘Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people’ (Marx, 1970, p. 17)
‘Religions are passionate communal displays of costly commitments to the satisfaction of non-natural beings and/or the overcoming of non-natural regulative structures resulting from evolutionary canalisation and convergence of: (1) Widespread belief in non-natural causal agents and/or non-natural regulative causal structures; and (2) Hard to fake public expressions of costly material commitments to the satisfaction of those non-natural causal agents and/or the overcoming of those non-natural causal regulative structures; and (3) Mastery of people’s existential anxieties by those costly commitments; and (4) Ritualised, rhythmic, sensory coordination of (1), (2), and (3) in communion, congregation and intimate fellowship.’ (Oppy, 2018, pp. 41–2)
The wide variety of definitions, of which those just presented are only a few, seems to be due to both the enormity of the subject matter and the diversity of different religious movements. As Oppy highlights, ‘religions involve big pictures, designated attitudes (e.g. faith), designated behaviours (e.g. fasting), designated practices (e.g. prayer), hierarchies, institutions, leaders, moral codes, public service, sacred objects, sacred sites, sacred texts, and saints, and much more besides’ (Oppy, 2018, p. 42). Notice how this presents a serious challenge to anyone attempting to define the abstract concept of “a religion” in terms of any given aspect of a particular religious movement. For example, while it is common for many religions to revolve around a belief in a God, some religions, such as Buddhism, involve no such beliefs. Thus, defining “religion,” the concept meant to identify all instances of a particular kind, in terms of a shared belief in a supernatural entity will prove unsatisfactory if one considers Buddhism to be a religion. In light of all of this, no specific definition of religion will be provided or defended when moving forward. This is so as to avoid a potentially problematic commitment to any specific definition of religion, while also sidestepping the need to provide a novel definition in the naïve hope of succeeding where countless other highly informed and intelligent researchers have failed. Instead, several common features from the definitions provided above will be highlighted in order to help identify those socio-cultural movements that may productively be thought of as religions.
There are nine common features derived from the definitions listed above that may facilitate the identification of a religious movement. It should be stressed that these features are neither necessary nor sufficient conditions for the existence of a religion.¹ Many religious movements will not share all of these characteristic features. The claim, however, is that a socio-cultural movement that has many of these features will be a good candidate to define as a religion. The more of these features a movement has, the more compelling the case will be to define it as a religion. These features are: (1) a shared belief in a, or many, supernatural entities; (2) a shared belief in supernatural laws; (3) a shared belief that adherents will be rewarded for their commitment in the future; (4) a distinction between sacred and non-sacred objects, beliefs, or actions; (5) a set of proscriptive and prescriptive moral rules; (6) a set of rituals or ceremonies, many of which are preformed communally; (7) a set of lauded leaders, these being either fictional, historical, or contemporary; (8) where some combination of the previous seven features help to guide individuals navigating everyday life; and which (9) can be thought to confer an adaptive evolutionary benefit to both individuals and collectives.
In light of these nine features, I will argue that Bitcoin, when viewed as a socio-cultural movement, can plausibly be defined as a religion. This is not to argue that every individual who owns bitcoins is a member of this religious movement, nor is it to argue that one must own bitcoins in order to be a member of the religion (although not owning any bitcoins while being a part of this religious movement would be rather strange). Anecdotally, it seems that there exists a highly committed group of Bitcoin zealots, the Bitcoin maximalists (also known as the “cyber hornets”), which can be contrasted against a larger group of less committed Bitcoin supporters. It is the zealous Bitcoin maximalists, in particular, that I am referring to throughout the remainder of this piece. It should also be made clear that I will not be making any formal normative assessments of the religious movement (at least at this stage). Which is to say that I will try to avoid describing the Bitcoin religious movement as either “good” or “bad,” while also avoiding derogatory descriptions of the movement, which might, for instance, cast it as a “cult.” Unfortunately, my bias is likely to shine through, although I will attempt to remain as philosophically objective as possible. With all of these preliminaries in place, I will now compare the nine religious features defined above in relation to the qualities displayed by the Bitcoin maximalist socio-cultural movement.
1: A shared belief in a, or many, supernatural entities — False
The Bitcoin maximalist community does not seem to be characterised by a shared belief in a singular, or a set of, supernatural entities. While many Bitcoin maximalists are adherents to other religious movements, and as a consequence believe in the existence of supernatural entities, this kind of belief does not seem to be shared widely among community members. Moreover, the Bitcoin maximalist community, as a whole, seems to be very open to individuals from any traditional religious background. Meaning that being a Bitcoin maximalist does not require one to abandon any pre-existing religious ties and beliefs in God/s, however conceived. Thus, the first defining feature of a religion seems to bear no resemblance to what is occurring in the Bitcoin maximalist community.
2: A shared belief in supernatural laws — Debatable
Whether or not this second feature of a religion applies to the Bitcoin maximalist community depends on how one defines “supernatural laws.” The Bitcoin maximalists are, as a collective, highly rational and sceptical. Assertions of “uncaused causes,” or an appeal to some kind of “cosmic justice” like Karma, are unlikely to be widely accepted. Thus, strictly speaking, this second feature does not seem to apply to this community as well. With that being said, however, there does seem to be a shared belief in free markets as being the most efficient and ethical means of human organisation. Whether one would describe free markets as embodying, or facilitating, supernatural laws is debatable, and hinges on how one defines the terms in question. For the moment it will be granted that this second feature also fails to apply to the Bitcoin maximalist community.
3: A shared belief that adherents will be rewarded for their commitment in future — True
One shared, and uniting, belief among Bitcoin maximalists is the view that all fiat currencies are doomed to fail, and that ₿itcoin will emerge as the primary global money following this inevitable collapse. This event is described as “hyperbitcoinisation.” While there are differing opinions regarding how, when, and why this event will occur, a unifying characteristic of Bitcoin maximalism is the strong belief that it will occur. Importantly, maximalists believe that they will be rewarded for their present-day commitment to Bitcoin with an enormous increase in purchasing and political power following hyperbitcoinisation. This shared belief in a prosperous future acts to both draw disenchanted outsiders into the community, while also reinforcing community norms and behaviours that are believed to bring about this event. The third characteristic feature of a religion seems to be present in the Bitcoin maximalist community.
4: A distinction between sacred and non-sacred objects, beliefs, or actions — True
While it is somewhat paradoxical to describe a kind of money, in and of itself, as being sacred, this does seem to be the case for Bitcoin.² In order to see this, notice that maximalism is partially characterised by a strong resistance to exchange bitcoins for fiat money, or other valuable consumer goods (e.g. lamborghinis). At the same time, Bitcoin maximalists will admonish those who do sell their bitcoins with emotionally charged rhetoric.³
An emblematic sign of something being sacred is the assertion that the thing in question is “beyond price ”(Handfield, 2019, p. 2). Bitcoins are routinely reported to be “beyond price,” and appear to be sacred for many in the Bitcoin maximalist community.
Moreover, the fundamental properties of Bitcoin, as money, also appear to be sacred to community members. Consider how Bitcoin maximalists are likely to react if a BIP is released proposing changes to the 21 million fixed supply, or the permissionless nature of transactions. Such suggestions are likely to be vehemently opposed, and this is a paradigmatic reaction that accompanies the defence of sacred values (Tetlock, 2003). It could also be argued that the originating white paper is widely viewed as a sacred text, akin to the Bible or the Quran. All of this is to say that the fourth religious feature of sacredness seems to hold true for this community.
5: A set of proscriptive and prescriptive moral rules — True
There are many deontic proscriptive and prescriptive moral rules in the Bitcoin maximalist community. A few examples include: “Hodl,” “don’t trust, verify,” “stay humble and stack sats,” “not your keys, not your coins,” and “buy the dip.” These are simple and easily remembered deontological moral rules that maximalists adhere to, and proselytise to others.
Importantly, these rules, if followed, will deliver one to the promised and desired future of hyperbitcoinisation described above. The fifth characteristic feature of religions seems to apply to the Bitcoin maximalist community.
6: A set of rituals or ceremonies, many of which are preformed communally — True
Among the many communal rituals that Bitcoin maximalists engage in is the construction and maintenance of one’s personal full node. This activity can be considered communal given that all full nodes are in constant communication with other nodes. Notice, also, how one’s full node can resemble a kind of shrine to the Bitcoin blockchain. In addition to running a full node, there exist community conferences like Bitcoin 2021, as well as more local community events like meet-ups.
If all of this remains unconvincing, consider the celebrations that Bitcoin maximalists recognise annually like “proof of keys day,” or “pizza day,” which commemorate important historical events to the Bitcoin community. The celebrations that take place every halving is yet another example of the kind of communal rituals and ceremonies that are emblematic of religious movements. With all of this in mind, it seems clear that the sixth feature of a religion is observed in the Bitcoin maximalist community.
7: A set of lauded leaders, these being either fictional, historical, or contemporary –True
Satoshi Nakamoto, the unknown creator/s, of Bitcoin is the obvious example of a lauded leader for the Bitcoin maximalists. Every single word written by Satoshi has been meticulously recorded, with community members commonly echoing particularly salient sentences.
Additionally, there are many contemporary leaders for Bitcoin maximalists to rally behind, and receive guiding wisdom from. Individuals like Adam Back, Luke Dashjr, Preston Pysh, Matt Odell, American Hodl, Robert Breedlove, Michael Saylor, and Saifedean Ammous, among many others, fulfil these leadership roles for the maximalist community.
Thus, the Bitcoin maximalist community certainly has a set of lauded leaders that help to guide the community values and shape discussions, thereby satisfying the seventh characteristic feature of a religion.
8: Where some combination of the previous seven features help to guide individuals navigating everyday life — True
When taken together, the features of the Bitcoin maximalist community described above provide individuals with a unified world-view. Very simply, the world-view is something like this:
Humanity is enslaved by central bankers and corrupt politicians who use fiat money to perpetrate an enormous injustice. The negative ramifications of fiat money, and central planning more generally, reverberate throughout our global society. Many, if not all, of the problems we face in society can be attributed to the global fiat monetary system. Bitcoin fixes this. Bitcoin is a tool that will allow the Bitcoin maximalists to wrest control and autonomy from the pre-existing power structure. In so doing, the widespread adoption of Bitcoin will bring about a prosperous future for all of humanity. Every bitcoin maximalist has their part to play. Every maximalist must change their unit of account to Bitcoin, accumulate and hodl as much as they can, and spread the good word to whoever will listen.
Notice how this world-view provides a disturbing, yet empowering, narrative for community members to believe in. The thought is that, “yes, the world is fucked, but through your actions you can help to manifest a better future that’s worth fighting for!” This is an incredibly optimistic means of engaging with the world, especially when contrasted against the apparent world-view of many outsiders who seem to be unempowered, miserable, and hysterically upset about comparatively inconsequential concerns like a bad seasonal flu, or the gender identity of strangers.
As has been noticed by others, there is a strong desire for individuals to undergo a positive transformation following their revelatory exposure to the Bitcoin maximalist community. This manifests itself in a variety of ways for different individuals but some examples include, the carnivore or keto diet, weight lifting, running, Brazilian jiu jitsu, fasting, experimenting with magic mushrooms, meditation, and entrepreneurial endeavours.
Thus, the Bitcoin maximalist world-view equips community members with a productive means of navigating everyday life. And, given that this is precisely the function that religions serve for societies, the eighth characteristic of a religion applies to the Bitcoin maximalist community.
9: And can be thought to confer an adaptive evolutionary benefit to both individuals and collectives — True
In light of the arguments just made it seems clear that the beliefs attendant with Bitcoin maximalism confer an adaptive evolutionary advantage to community members. Maximalists are empowered and hopeful in the face of daunting challenges, the same can hardly be said of almost any other communities. This level of positivity and optimism will enable Bitcoin maximalists to outcompete rivals who are deeply unhappy and see very little reason to strive for a better future. Moreover, as the price of a bitcoin continues its meteoric rise, maximalists witness their purchasing power increase dramatically. This increase in purchasing power provides freedom and optionality that non-believers are not exposed to. Both of these dynamics allow the Bitcoin maximalists to outcompete competitors, which satisfies the final characteristic of a religion.
We are left, then, with seven of the nine characteristics of a religion being satisfied for the Bitcoin maximalist community, with only two being unsatisfied (although the second is debatable). Seven out of nine characteristics, it seems to me, is sufficient to classify this socio-cultural movement as a religion. Those two unsatisfied characteristics are each concerned with supernatural entities or laws. As already mentioned, Bitcoin maximalists are highly rational and sceptical. Because of this, it is unsurprising that these two features do not hold true for this community.
In order to truly drive the point home, I will end this piece by highlighting three further characteristics of the Bitcoin maximalist community that parallels pre-existing religious movements.
Further Parallels to Traditional Religions
Firstly, there is a strong internal desire felt by newly inducted community members to proselytise the beliefs of Bitcoin maximalism to outsiders. Many traditional religions are characterised by proselytising members, and Bitcoin is no different. The overwhelming desire that individuals feel to shout their newly formed beliefs from the rooftops is a testament to the strength and positivity of the maximalist community.
Secondly, the mystery surrounding the origins of Bitcoin and the true identity of Satoshi Nakamoto provides this community with a creation myth that would make most traditional religious movements envious. Moreover, the sacrifice that Satoshi has made by stepping away from the project and never moving his huge stack of bitcoins is reminiscent of the sacrifice made by Jesus Christ to save humanity.
Thirdly, and finally, much like what occurred during the protestant reformation with Christianity, Bitcoin maximalism has witnessed the formation of heretical offshoots given fundamental disagreements regarding interpretations of sacred scripture. In this light, the Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Satoshi Vision maximalists can each be considered heretical fundamentalists that have broken away from the original socio-cultural movement that is Bitcoin. They left the Bitcoin maximalist religion to form their own sect given a disagreement over core values (decentralisation) and the interpretation of the word “cash.”
When viewed in this way, the block size wars that occurred a few years ago represented a period of religious fracturing and reformation.
Thank you very much for your time! Any support would be greatly appreciated.
[1]: I know this is philosophically inelegant, but the lack of consensus regarding an agreed upon definition leaves me with little choice but to sidestep the definitional issue in this manner.
[2]: This could be considered paradoxical because sacredness is often defined as being in opposition to , and incommensurable with, standard economic incentives (Handfield, 2019).
[3]:A more thorough treatment of Bitcoin as sacred money will be provided in the near future, stay tuned!
References:
Alcorta, C.S., Sosis, R., 2005. Ritual, emotion, and sacred symbols. Human nature 16, 323–359.
Borowik, I., 2011. The changing meanings of religion. Sociological theories of religion in the perspective of the last 100 years. International Review of Sociology 21, 175–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2011.544196
Bruce, S., 2011. Defining religion: a practical response. International Review of Sociology 21, 107–120.
Durkheim, E., 1995. Elementary forms of the religious life: Newly translated by Karen E. Fields. Simon and Schuster.
Geertz, C., Banton, M., 1966. Religion as a cultural system.
Handfield, T., 2019. The coevolution of sacred value and religion. Religion, Brain & Behavior 1–20.
Klass, M., 1995. Ordered Universes: Approaches to the Anthropology of Religion. Boulder: Westview.
Koenig, H.G., 2008. Medicine, religion, and health: Where science and spirituality meet. Templeton Foundation Press.
Marx, K., 1970. Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right. Cambridge (At the University Press).
Oppy, G., 2018. Naturalism and Religion: A Contemporary Philosophical Investigation. Routledge.
Stark, R., Bainbridge, W.S., 1985. The future of religion: Secularization, revival and cult formation. Univ of California Press.
Tetlock, P.E., 2003. Thinking the unthinkable: sacred values and taboo cognitions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7, 320–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1364-6613(03)00135-9
Willander, E., 2014. What counts as religion in sociology?: the problem of religiosity in sociological methodology (PhD Thesis). Sociologiska institutionen.
Woodhead, L., 2011. Five concepts of religion. International review of Sociology 21, 121–143.
Yinger, J.M., 1957. Religion, society and the individual; an introduction to the sociology of religion.
