10 Responses to “What is the line that divides philosophy from religion?”
Noel Connolly Said:
IMO, it all depends on the number of people who believe in it. If enough people started believing in “The force” It could very well become a religion. Look at Agnosticism for example. It use to not be a religion, but they noticed allot of people representing that belief that it is now classified as a religion.
Caitlin Crittenden Said:
Philosophy are religion are different with their methods of inquiry. But their subject matter is almost the same. Philosophy inquires with the help of reason, religion with intuition.
In my opinion, philosophy ends with religion or fulfills religion. Human reason has a limit to explain the whole meaning of reality. Religion starts where philosophy stops. We need both religion and philosophy to have a dynamic view of life.
Yaretzi Lightowler Said:
Philosophy becomes religion when the philosopher is done “thinking.”
Braeden Butcher Said:
The line is named “Hypothesis”
Braedon Gough Said:
Are Religion and Philosophy Two Ways of Doing the Same Thing?
Is religion just a type of philosophy? Is philosophy a religious activity? There seems to be some confusion at times over just whether and how religion and philosophy should be distinguished from each other — this confusion is not unjustified because there are some very strong similarities between the two.
The questions discussed in both religion and philosophy tend to be very much alike. Both religion and philosophy wrestle with problems like: What is good? What does it mean to live a good life? What is the nature of reality? Why are we here and what should we be doing? How should we treat each other? What is really most important in life?
Although most religions and spiritual beliefs are
clearly distinct from science on both a
philosophical and methodological level, the two
are not generally considered to be mutually
exclusive. A majority of humans hold a mix of both
scientific and religious views. The distinction
between philosophy and religion, on the other
hand, is at times less clear.
Elaina Davison Said:
When it ceases to be an enquiry and starts to insist on a particular answer as being the “truth”.
Sierra Ahmad Said:
One perspective:
True philosophy Loves wise dominion (“wisdom”), within One Mind Soul-individuation.
True religion provides a routinized method for One Mind Soul-individuation, aka “let this Mind be with you, which was also with Christ Jesus.”
The routinization or energy-application in religion is along lines of Light given by true Prophets, a kind of causal Jacobean ladder, wherein genuine application effects genuine progress, as in-Formed by God.
With philosophy, awareness of process as praxis is more prominent, than with a more formulaic and trust-based religiosity, which is relying on in-Formed Energy-effectuality.
As with any type of human endeavor, there are levels, types, degrees of purity, and intersections among methods
For example, Edmund Husserl could discern a faith-based practitioner of phenomenology from one whose awareness had been transformed by genuine epoche. The former, when sincere, could perhaps be helped, but when opining they were “doing phenomenology,” were too often as the “invincibly ignorant.”
p.s.
The so-called infantile or superstitious behavior of some religious has a parallel expression in the “Gradgrind” or “headucated,” aka “learned,” who may quote chapter and verse, but who are not “walking the talk.” This is a kind of rote or “mechanization man,” well-profiled in Mark Prophet’s “The Soulless One.”
If a religious becomes fanatic, it is like an academic becoming pompous.
Martha Beck, Ph.D., in her “Expecting Adam,” and Sunyata, in his “Dancing with the Void,” demonstrate what Tibetan Buddhists term “chod,” or “cutting through material-spiritual density,” a kind of kamikaze, zenlike “pedal to the metal” “when push comes to shove” “necessity is the mother of invention” shtick. Saint Paul’s conversion experience is a more nuanced and guided version of such radical DOS (denial of (synthetic) self). It is a kind of transformation of infantile religious or pompous academic into the “real deal.” Sunyata’s way was more gentle, albeit truly radical.
Davon 177 Said:
The short answer is this: Philosophy is logic based; religion is faith based.
The two are diametrically opposed.
Bradyn Craddock Said:
The difference between philosophy and religion is a comitment. One has crossed into the realm of religion from philosophy when one has a personal stake in the answers to one’s questions – or a parameter/boundry which exists for them. These blinders exist for all of us within different questions and to different degrees.
harrispatrick Said:
philosophy deals more with facts, what can be proven. What we can see for ourselves and draw conclusions. Religion is more along the lines of faith. Nothing to draw from, no proof to go off of, other than what other people tell you. The problem with that is people start to take their faith as fact, and try to convince others that philosophy is wrong.
I’m not here to tell you which one is right or wrong. That choice is yours.
IMO, it all depends on the number of people who believe in it. If enough people started believing in “The force” It could very well become a religion. Look at Agnosticism for example. It use to not be a religion, but they noticed allot of people representing that belief that it is now classified as a religion.
Philosophy are religion are different with their methods of inquiry. But their subject matter is almost the same. Philosophy inquires with the help of reason, religion with intuition.
In my opinion, philosophy ends with religion or fulfills religion. Human reason has a limit to explain the whole meaning of reality. Religion starts where philosophy stops. We need both religion and philosophy to have a dynamic view of life.
Philosophy becomes religion when the philosopher is done “thinking.”
The line is named “Hypothesis”
Are Religion and Philosophy Two Ways of Doing the Same Thing?
Is religion just a type of philosophy? Is philosophy a religious activity? There seems to be some confusion at times over just whether and how religion and philosophy should be distinguished from each other — this confusion is not unjustified because there are some very strong similarities between the two.
The questions discussed in both religion and philosophy tend to be very much alike. Both religion and philosophy wrestle with problems like: What is good? What does it mean to live a good life? What is the nature of reality? Why are we here and what should we be doing? How should we treat each other? What is really most important in life?
Although most religions and spiritual beliefs are
clearly distinct from science on both a
philosophical and methodological level, the two
are not generally considered to be mutually
exclusive. A majority of humans hold a mix of both
scientific and religious views. The distinction
between philosophy and religion, on the other
hand, is at times less clear.
When it ceases to be an enquiry and starts to insist on a particular answer as being the “truth”.
One perspective:
True philosophy Loves wise dominion (“wisdom”), within One Mind Soul-individuation.
True religion provides a routinized method for One Mind Soul-individuation, aka “let this Mind be with you, which was also with Christ Jesus.”
The routinization or energy-application in religion is along lines of Light given by true Prophets, a kind of causal Jacobean ladder, wherein genuine application effects genuine progress, as in-Formed by God.
With philosophy, awareness of process as praxis is more prominent, than with a more formulaic and trust-based religiosity, which is relying on in-Formed Energy-effectuality.
As with any type of human endeavor, there are levels, types, degrees of purity, and intersections among methods
For example, Edmund Husserl could discern a faith-based practitioner of phenomenology from one whose awareness had been transformed by genuine epoche. The former, when sincere, could perhaps be helped, but when opining they were “doing phenomenology,” were too often as the “invincibly ignorant.”
p.s.
The so-called infantile or superstitious behavior of some religious has a parallel expression in the “Gradgrind” or “headucated,” aka “learned,” who may quote chapter and verse, but who are not “walking the talk.” This is a kind of rote or “mechanization man,” well-profiled in Mark Prophet’s “The Soulless One.”
If a religious becomes fanatic, it is like an academic becoming pompous.
Martha Beck, Ph.D., in her “Expecting Adam,” and Sunyata, in his “Dancing with the Void,” demonstrate what Tibetan Buddhists term “chod,” or “cutting through material-spiritual density,” a kind of kamikaze, zenlike “pedal to the metal” “when push comes to shove” “necessity is the mother of invention” shtick. Saint Paul’s conversion experience is a more nuanced and guided version of such radical DOS (denial of (synthetic) self). It is a kind of transformation of infantile religious or pompous academic into the “real deal.” Sunyata’s way was more gentle, albeit truly radical.
The short answer is this: Philosophy is logic based; religion is faith based.
The two are diametrically opposed.
The difference between philosophy and religion is a comitment. One has crossed into the realm of religion from philosophy when one has a personal stake in the answers to one’s questions – or a parameter/boundry which exists for them. These blinders exist for all of us within different questions and to different degrees.
philosophy deals more with facts, what can be proven. What we can see for ourselves and draw conclusions. Religion is more along the lines of faith. Nothing to draw from, no proof to go off of, other than what other people tell you. The problem with that is people start to take their faith as fact, and try to convince others that philosophy is wrong.
I’m not here to tell you which one is right or wrong. That choice is yours.