>>17931886 (OP)
People already tried that, it was called the age of enlightenment. While it wasn't a direct worship of science and reason, it was the result of the rising use of logic and empiricism to understand the world, as opposed to religious faith and a heavy reliance on traditions/customs. And if you're wondering why the world isn't some perfect utopia, fully realized in its ability to enact logic to the highest degree, it's because as it turns out, while the scientific method is great for understanding the world physically and empirically, it holds far less power to create lasting social structures that support the development and stability of civilization.
As it turns out, when you strip away all the "illogical" aspects of civilization, you're not left with much. While the idea of that much idealogical freedom might sound like a great place to start building a better world, the existentialists who've been grappling with that setting since the 1800s, would beg to differ. Building new social structures is hard; similar to how most revolutions end up with a dictator in the end, instead of the shining democracy the soldiers were promised, creating new foundations for society, largely ends up putting right back where we were, with a fresh coat of paint to disguise the same institutions we had before. Because those institutions were rarely about genuine religious sentiment, as much as they were about justifying the existence of the ruling class.
Hinduism is a good example of the staying power of a religious force. It's arguably the oldest continuously practiced religion in the world, and has been the driving force behind civilizations that have existed for thousands of years. It's also horrifically oppressive, has no social mobility, etc. Why has it stuck around? Because it tells people exactly where they belong in society, that it's their own fault they're there, and that in order to have a better life, they need to keep their head down, and work until they die.
