Religion vs. Philosophy

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
enegue
Posts: 1950
Joined: September 4th, 2009, 8:18 am
Favorite Philosopher: God
Location: Australia

Post by enegue »

Wooden shoe wrote:Hello Enegue.

Your concept of a society all with the same goal, walking and acting in lockstep with each other according to the dictates of some leader scares the hell out of me.
I know it does, because it's based on a fundamental immutable truth. If you were dangled from the top of a fifty story building that would likely scare the hell out of you too, because you know the effect of gravity is a fundamental universal truth too.
Wooden shoe wrote:This has been tried, all with very negative result.
Can you back this statement up with some hard evidence? Please tell me the nations who you believe have adhered to the ten commandments and not prospered?
Wooden shoe wrote:Perhaps I am wrong but I sense you see things as black and white.
Your reference to the 10 commandments as being an absolute makes me think you have not really studied them.
For instance the "you shall not kill" seems to apply only to not killing other Jews as shortly after giving this command God orders the Jews to commit genocide.
Those who occupied the land had polluted it because the did not adhere to the ten commandments, so they were displaced. If you are polluting your world because you are not adhering to the ten commandments then you too will be displaced. Whatever you have will be taken from you. It is a fundamental immutable law.

I don't understand how you can be so blind. Why is the US economy in trouble? Because the US as a nation has dropped the ball. The weight of so many citizens engaged in self-indulgent behaviour has brought the nation to its knees. God doesn't have to do anything but let you have what you want. The fundamental immutable laws of the universe will do the rest.
Wooden shoe wrote:Giving honour to parents is disputed by Jesus and who can blame someone who is starving, for stealing food.
There is a clear order you know. If your parents are at variance with the fundamental laws of abundant life, then they should be defied because they are trying to persuade their children that their foolishness will not bring disaster.
Wooden shoe wrote:There are very few absolutes other then you and I were born and we will die at some time
You can not prove the existence of a deity just as I can not prove the non-existence of same, however the need for prove lies in your corner, not in mine.
I don't have to prove there's a God, because it is self-evident. We have his instructions for abundant life and we can prove for ourselves whether they are right or wrong. I'd like to see you teaching your kids that they shouldn't honour you? It's almost funny that you could suggest it.

If you adhere to the ten commandments you won't need to steal.

Cheers,
enegue
Roger_pearse
Posts: 19
Joined: August 6th, 2011, 9:16 am

Post by Roger_pearse »

I see methodological problems on both sides here.
enegue wrote:
Wooden shoe wrote: You can not prove the existence of a deity just as I can not prove the non-existence of same, however the need for prove lies in your corner, not in mine.
This "prove things to me" should trigger a warning light in us all. All of us live by some set of values. No set of values should be a default, which is what is implied here. There are two value-sets on the table; one is some subset of conformity to the societal values of our times, as I can see from the points made; the other looks like Christianity. But both sides have to state their propositions explicitly and be evaluated explicitly. This is where the conformist side invariably fail; for the same reason that fish probably find it hard to discuss water. But we have to see this position as what it is -- living by contemporary values. And these values change every 50 years or so.

And now to the response.
I don't have to prove there's a God, because it is self-evident.
It is not self-evident to me. But what IS evident to me is that any argument about whether we should be Christians or conformists (I'd prefer some other term which contemporary values don't use as a boo-word, but I don't have one) is not usefully begun with "can we prove whether there is a god". People who say yes come to that conclusion based on other reasons; people who say no do so mainly for other reasons.

In short the debate gets mis-stated from day 1.

All the best,

Roger Pearse
enegue
Posts: 1950
Joined: September 4th, 2009, 8:18 am
Favorite Philosopher: God
Location: Australia

Post by enegue »

Hi, Roger.

I'm not sure where you arrived in the debate, but I'm suggesting that the ten commandments transcend time and culture. There is never a time or mode of living that will prove them false. They are as immutable as the other laws of the physical universe.

When God declares, "You shall have no other gods besides me!", he is stating what any provider of resources would say, implicit or explicit, "These are my resources and I make them available to you. If you do well you will be accepted and prosper, if you don't do well then you will suffer the inevitable consequences of no longer having access to them. Parents, teachers, bosses, law enforcement representatives, governments, etc, all take such a position. It may not be politically correct to think of it in these terms, but it is what it is.

What nation can pursue national goals unless the majority of its citizens are pulling in the same direction and are united behind a national leader who has a nation vision. This is a general statement of truth, regardless of the law at the heart of that nation. Whether or not the nation is good or evil does not change the immutable nature of this law. Good nations will persist, evil nations will not.

The existence of the law, proves the existence of God. Whether or not we choose to attribute the law to man or to God is immaterial and adherence to the law is not a matter or "having to", but "wanting to" because it is the only rational way for mankind to persist in this creation.

Cheers,
enegue
Roger_pearse
Posts: 19
Joined: August 6th, 2011, 9:16 am

Post by Roger_pearse »

Ah, I had misunderstood the point you were making - thanks!

The 10 commandments as an example of the natural law, then, and the natural law as something we can discover exists among us -- with that I would agree.
nameless
Posts: 1230
Joined: May 13th, 2008, 9:06 pm
Location: Here/Now

Re: Religion vs. Philosophy

Post by nameless »

cynicallyinsane wrote:What's the difference between religion and philosophy? Aren't they both the search for fundemental truths?
'Philosophy' is the way of knowing by 'critical thought', the practice thereof.

Critical Thinking Mini Lessons
http://www.skepdic.com/refuge/ctlessons.html

Bertrand Russell on Critical Thinking
http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Educ/EducHare.htm

'Religion' is the way of knowing by 'belief'.
Critical thought and belief are both 'thought'.
Another way of knowing is 'intuition', an immediate knowing sans the process of 'thought'
All are valid ways of knowing the features of the One Reality.
Stanley Huang
Posts: 525
Joined: April 7th, 2011, 9:52 am

Religion vs. Philosophy

Post by Stanley Huang »

I read a book and the scholar says: "Philosophy is developed out of religion."

So, even if you think that philosophy is not the same as religion, at least, there must be a link.

To me, philosophy is the same as religion.

Otherwise, why is it that many philosophers in the beginning will show respect for religion, and it is only when philosophical ideas develop, that some people start to doubt about the idea of eternity, so and so forth.
Wooden shoe
Posts: 1510
Joined: March 6th, 2011, 12:25 am
Location: Dryden ON Canada

Post by Wooden shoe »

Stanley.

This so-called scholar is hardly believable as it seems he ignored Buddha, the Greek and the Roman philosophers.
Philosophy is trying for truth, whereas religion does not care for truth, only its dogma.

In the western world, once christianity started to dominate, not including religion was considered a sin, punishable by death.
This did not change until the reformation.
We experience today through the lens of all our yesterdays
Stanley Huang
Posts: 525
Joined: April 7th, 2011, 9:52 am

Religion vs. Philosophy

Post by Stanley Huang »

Dear Wodden Shoe,

Buddhism is not even a religion, since Buddha does not talk about much about what is beyond speculative thinking.

Well, if you make a difference between feeling religion and belief religion, then, there is no confusion.

In the past, people in China follow feeling religion. Zen is feeling religion. Confucianism may be feeling religion and Taoism may be feeling religion.

Feeling religion is what you feel, like I feel there is a demon, which is not the same as I believe there is a demon.

So feeling religion is more liberal, where it does not force people what to believe, rather, it encourages people what to feel.

But Christian is following belief religion, and belief religion may tell people what to believe or what to do, and this may lead to war or inequality.

And I feel in the past, people outside Asia are following belief religion and people in India also follow belief religion so they have inequality or caste system.

And the countries influenced by Chinese culture like Japan and Korea are following feeling religion.

Will this clear up the confusion?
enegue
Posts: 1950
Joined: September 4th, 2009, 8:18 am
Favorite Philosopher: God
Location: Australia

Post by enegue »

Wooden shoe wrote:In the western world, once christianity started to dominate, not including religion was considered a sin, punishable by death.
This did not change until the reformation.
Christianity never started to dominate. A secular humanist by the name of Constantine, could see that Christians had a way of life that was sensible and admirable and he decided to impose that way of life on his people.

Jesus' teaching did not support the way Constantine chose to behave:

“You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and those who are great exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant. And whoever desires to be first among you, let him be your slave— just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

If someone is behaving or speaking in any way counter to what Jesus taught, then it is not Christianity. Christians are followers of Jesus, not followers of the church.

Cheers,
enegue
Wooden shoe
Posts: 1510
Joined: March 6th, 2011, 12:25 am
Location: Dryden ON Canada

Post by Wooden shoe »

Enegue.

Do you make that fine kind of distinction between a Muslim extremist and Islam generally?
Just because the type of Christianity practiced during the dark ages in Europe does not meet your standard is irrelevant as to the pressure put on philosophers in that time period.
We experience today through the lens of all our yesterdays
enegue
Posts: 1950
Joined: September 4th, 2009, 8:18 am
Favorite Philosopher: God
Location: Australia

Post by enegue »

Wooden shoe wrote:Enegue.

Do you make that fine kind of distinction between a Muslim extremist and Islam generally?
Absolutely!
Wooden shoe wrote:Just because the type of Christianity practiced during the dark ages in Europe does not meet your standard is irrelevant as to the pressure put on philosophers in that time period.
It's not my standard. It is the standard that was established by the one who gave his life for many.

No Christians used strength of arms, finance, intellectual argument, etc to force Constantine to adopt Christian principles. He could see that their "way of life" was powerful and he decided that it would be a good model to impose on his people. You are mistaking the beginnings of the church with the teachings of Christ.

I understand how you might make such a mistake, but you have the resources necessary to judge for yourself the differences. It's only a matter of whether you want to or not.

Cheers,
enegue
Wooden shoe
Posts: 1510
Joined: March 6th, 2011, 12:25 am
Location: Dryden ON Canada

Post by Wooden shoe »

Enegue.

I have no interest in determining who is a real christian or not, In my mind they are all deluded and I was one of them for a large part of my life.
The point I was making regarding philosophers during the ages the catholic church dominated still holds.
Is it possible for you to stay on topic and stop throwing up red herrings?
We experience today through the lens of all our yesterdays
enegue
Posts: 1950
Joined: September 4th, 2009, 8:18 am
Favorite Philosopher: God
Location: Australia

Post by enegue »

Wooden shoe wrote:Enegue.

I have no interest in determining who is a real christian or not, In my mind they are all deluded and I was one of them for a large part of my life.
The point I was making regarding philosophers during the ages the catholic church dominated still holds.
Is it possible for you to stay on topic and stop throwing up red herrings?
I don't think you understand the notion of a discussion. One of the most important things to do is to agree on definitions, otherwise you will go round and round and never arrive at any useful conclusions.

I'm very happy that it was YOU who used the term "real christian" because it means you understand there is a difference between what is real and what is sham. So then, regardless of your opinion about their all being deluded, do you imagine the demise of the philosophers, you are referring to was caused by the real or the sham Christians? You're not a bigot are you?

Were you a real Christian or a sham christian?

Cheers,
enegue
Nubbles
Posts: 132
Joined: August 19th, 2011, 2:09 pm

Post by Nubbles »

enegue wrote:
Wooden shoe wrote:Enegue.

I have no interest in determining who is a real christian or not, In my mind they are all deluded and I was one of them for a large part of my life.
The point I was making regarding philosophers during the ages the catholic church dominated still holds.
Is it possible for you to stay on topic and stop throwing up red herrings?
I don't think you understand the notion of a discussion. One of the most important things to do is to agree on definitions, otherwise you will go round and round and never arrive at any useful conclusions.

I'm very happy that it was YOU who used the term "real christian" because it means you understand there is a difference between what is real and what is sham. So then, regardless of your opinion about their all being deluded, do you imagine the demise of the philosophers, you are referring to was caused by the real or the sham Christians? You're not a bigot are you?

Were you a real Christian or a sham christian?

Cheers,
enegue
So everyone needs to agree on definitions?

Define "discussion".
You're not a bigot, are you?

See what I'm saying?
Wooden shoe
Posts: 1510
Joined: March 6th, 2011, 12:25 am
Location: Dryden ON Canada

Post by Wooden shoe »

I am not going to get into a discussion as to who of the thousands of denominations who call themselves christian are good or bad because it has nothing to do with what I posted.
The same pressure occurred in the islamic world, and has nothing to do with good or bad islam as it has nothing to do with good or bad christianity.
We experience today through the lens of all our yesterdays
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021