Religion Vs. Philosophy

[Nihil]

I have been thinking... :think:

What is the difference between a religion and a philosophical system of thought?
Is it just because a religion needs to agroup a lot of followers or is it because Philosophy encourages us to think by ourselves?
I believe this is an important matter to be discussed!

[vicente]

re·li·gion n.
1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
3. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
4. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
5. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.


phi·los·o·phy n.
1. Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
2. Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.
3. A system of thought based on or involving such inquiry: the philosophy of Hume.
4. The critical analysis of fundamental assumptions or beliefs.
5. The disciplines presented in university curriculums of science and the liberal arts, except medicine, law, and theology.
6. The discipline comprising logic, ethics, aesthetics, metaphysics, and epistemology.


If religion had to pass a philosophical test for its existence, religion (except for Buddhism) would not , in my opinion, exist.

:)

[jody]

Originally posted by Nihil@Oct 10 2004, 03:42 AM
I have been thinking... :think:

What is the difference between a religion and a philosophical system of thought?
Is it just because a religion needs to agroup a lot of followers or is it because Philosophy encourages us to think by ourselves?
I believe this is an important matter to be discussed!
If the conclusions of a discussion are to be accepted by people from diverse religious backgrounds, then that discussion must make as few assumptions as possible.
However, all societies start with the following a priori assumptions:

There are sets of beliefs that are "religious"
These beliefs are distinct from secular beliefs and recognizable as "religious"
The most controversial, there are ways to recognize which beliefs are "religious" and which are "secular.

[a random hack]

If the conclusions of a discussion are to be accepted by people from diverse religious backgrounds, then that discussion must make as few assumptions as possible.
However, all societies start with the following a priori assumptions:

There are sets of beliefs that are "religious"
These beliefs are distinct from secular beliefs and recognizable as "religious"
The most controversial, there are ways to recognize which beliefs are "religious" and which are "secular.

ok, that's 5 :lol:

[Nihil]

Answering vicente

I do not believe that any religion had passed through a Philosophical test; that would mean the end of the dogma – Budhism can be considered a way of being in life but as that tries to explain the complexity of the world by convicting its members on a mystical and metaphysical theory, I guess that you can be mistaken – at least I DO NOT AGREE with what you saying! :nono:

[Nihil]

Answering jody

Societies are not obligatorily religious! What you’re talking about, the way I see it, is the social expectation of behaviour – education and morality – and not a religious creed. When religion says that their ideas are the correct ones – which occur in most of the cases, then it became a social jail of the mind. Even if you do not follow any religion, society impels you its values that will interfere in your action.
But in the overall, I agree with the main ideas of the last argumentation of yours. :thumbsup: