cynicallyinsane wrote:What's the difference between religion and philosophy? Aren't they both the search for fundemental truths?
ape: Re-ligion is binding what's already bound, and is referring to the ontological fact that all words and their opposites are interdefinable in terms of each other or bound to each other. In other words, all opposites are also composites.
Then when the word Love is used to love all of these already bound or bonded words, Love re-binds or religaments them all.
This is why The Truth of Love is the true religion and makes all other religions true.
"Every religion emphasizes human improvement, Love, Respect for others,
sharing other people's suffering. On these lines every religion had more or less the same viewpoint and the same goal."
The Dalai Lam
Philosophy is simply the same Love of wisdom, which wisdom also has an opposite, fooldom, in whose terms each is definable!
So really, Philosophy is about the Love of the Wisdom of Love for both wisdom and its ontological inter-bonded counterpart, fooldom.
So this is why the Wisdom of Love is the true philosophy and makes all other philosophies true.
Philosophy, then, is simply just one part of Religion, which Religion is about ALL inter-bonded words.
But because both P & R are also loved, each contains all the other and the other also contains all of each.
So we have the Philosophy of Religion and the Religion of Philosophy.
Thus, Philosophy and Religion are not only different but also exactly the same.
"All philosophy [The Love of the word wisdom], then, is essentially philology[Love of words].
And philology, with its great and fruitful law of
analogical formations, gives its head to chance, and to the irrational, to the absolutely immeasurable."
Miguel de Unamuno
NB: Dogma - New World Encyclopedia:
Some philosophical schools stood by their dogmas with a fervor that could be described as religious, which no doubt laid the ... www.newworldencyclopedia.org/../Dogma