Participants of this forum? Quick question...?

Question

Wondering what denominations of people in this forum - religious? (religion if yes)? Atheist? Agnostic?

For religious people, why does philosopy tie with your religious beliefs?

This is no sarcasm, and people with a lot of emotional stake once again, please feel free to spend your time more on the questions over in R&S forum. I am not here to get someone's heart pumping faster.

Oops. Please read it as "how does philosophy ties with reli....". My fault - typo and no proof reading.

Peta, I just did. It was a typo and it was supposed to be a "how". My internet connection is irritatringly intermittent and well... why doesn't matter. Anyway...

the_lips: can you expand a bit if you don't mind about what you said (and your view) on "how philosophy seeks to impose some kind of logic and rationality to religion. "

Thanks.

peta. i understand you don't agree with something i said. but honestly, i don't understand why or what is there to disagree. i did not convey any opinions in that question of mine. i wanted to understand how philosophy and faith play together in someone's life. i am not even trying to convey my opinions of what i think philosophy is, religion is. but i could expand that more, but I am afraid this becomes another question in R&S forum. I apologize for having to wear my mask to hide my face - i do it when i think my face is not relevent to my voice.

everyone, i really like your responses. they trigger more questions from myside but given i am not even sure whether anyone is going to look at this, i'll close this question now.

Thanks much - the answers (everyone one of them and i mean it) told me a lot. i hope you'll notice my questions in the future and would want to answer them.

Answer 1

I like your question very much. Thank you for asking it.

Personally, I am a polytheist. Which works out pretty well for me, as I'm more than happy to allow anyone any god they like. It doesn't work out quite as well for some other people who try to insist that my divine inspiration is markedly less than theirs. So it goes.

I think philosophy has long had very close ties to religion, as it has with many other fields (particularly science). Much of philosophy is about limits. What follows from what. What is reasonable, and what is irrational. A probe into the nature of things... even religious ones.

Religion has a (not unique) privilege of being partially immune to the attacks of philosophers. Unlike science, it's okay for a religious concept to be completely unreasonable. The supernatural, pretty much by definition, is beyond what is natural. Thus theists really only need worry if they wanted their particular beliefs to fall into a category that they don't.

Because my particular religion tries to be completely consistant with the real world, I believe that I can learn more about some of my gods by studying the real world. Science tells me how some of them do things, and philosophy fills in many of the gaps that science cannot possibly bridge on its own. Outside of both of these fields lies my theology, that fills in details that neither can supply.

I happen to like it very much. I hope your beliefs do as well for you!

Answer 2

Well said sir - I've said it before that some people seem to think of philosophy as some kind of mystical quasi-religious discipline.

It isn't - in its purist form it should be rigorously controlled by logic.

I am a Christian and I see there is a sharp dividing line between logic and faith. As such I feel that, although the study of religion and philosophy may fall in the "Humanities" bracket, that are related only in how philosophy seeks to impose some kind of logic and rationality to religion.

EDIT :
I certainly can expand. Philosophy is not religion and, vice versa, religion is not philosophy - but many people on here tend to confuse the two......hence it is not necessary to be religious in order to be a philosopher.

But, as religion is a condition of man, philosophy must strive to make sense of it but only by applying the proper rules of philosophy (that is, specifically, logic) can we come to a rational answer.

If we do not apply logic, then we are left with nothing more than faith. There is nothing wrong with faith but it does not "prove" anything. Philosophy does not always "prove" anything either but by applying logic it can be possible to prove why God should or should not exist, for example.

Aristotle has covered this as "God, The Immovable Mover" - more on the attached link.

Answer 3

I'm a fairly decent Christian, but a lousy Southern Baptist.

If I answer the question as originally written, then I would say, "Because my religious beliefs are largely the source of my philosophy."

To more directly answer what you meant to ask, the answer doesn't change much. My philosophy stems largely from my religious beliefs.

While I do understand what you mean by the way you phrased your question, technically atheism is a religion, and by technical definition, most atheists I know are far more religious than most of those I know who adhere to the concept of a higher power.

Answer 4

I am a Christian. More specifically, Lutheran.
I am in the philosophy section more then the religion and spirituality lately. I think this section tends to ask much the same questions, but are usually not as sarcasm based as the R&S section tends to be.

Answer 5

Agnostic...I suppose.

Atheism demands too much certainty and smacks of arrogance. It seems a bit hypocritical to deride theists for their absolute beliefs when atheists, by design, maintain a similar absolutism.

I accept quite easily that I cannot be certain and wish most people felt the same way. Accepting our very contradictory and implausible versions of divinity feels infantile...an immature version of the Great Santa Claus in the sky to whom we pray for...our own pleasure.

If an omnipotent being is indeed behind our existence, I greatly doubt our ability to know Him, to know His will and can hardly accept that He ever prescribed eating habits, methods of bartering or sexual behavior. The human touch and influence is a bit too obvious.

Answer 6

You state:

For religious people, why does philosopy tie with your religious beliefs?

I don't agree with that statement. Can you clarify it to explain why you think it is true?

Edit: I understand what you mean, I'm not questioning the typo, I'm questioning the whole statement. What do you mean? Do you think religious people are illogical? Can you give more detail so I can get your point.

Answer 7

Politicians want a job in simple terms as you desire a job. they ought to be elected to the jib so as that they do no longer say what they have self assurance they are asserting what they think of you desire to take heed to so which you will vote for them. Democrat or Republican that announces what you do ot desire to take heed to will ot get elected. Iraq is the massive conflict floor now yet in some months it heavily isn't. the themes will exchange after the 1st of the 300 and sixty 5 days. the two events comprehend okay that the troops won't have the ability to be extra domicile for numerous years yet. this could be a actuality that no mater however if it truly is democrat or republican the troops will ought to stay there for it sluggish yet. looks fairly unusual to me that all people is so upset approximately almost 4 thousand individuals have died over there by fact that this started. on the comparable time over thirty thousand of you have died on the countries roads each and each 3 hundred and sixty 5 days. That quantities to the total form of troops over there now and greater. whilst are you going to handle what's occurring at your front door. i comprehend you will no longer do something in any respect. you do no longer care.you're purely mouthing what you think of you need to.

Answer 8

Thanks for intelligent and polite question.

Philosophers cannot and must not seek to impose anything onto religion's content nor onto its non-practicing "believers". thinking for onseself precludes collectivism--imposition of anything as a crime onto another.

Religionists believe they have secret information about a life-to-come much different (worse or better) than Earth.
So, that's logically why they must give up irrelevant Earth and its temptations so as not to get sidetracked, enter a monastery, and leave their books of claims behind, so people can visit them and ask, "How's it going in there? And when old enough, perhaps join them if one wants to.

Philosophers seek to define absolute category-level definitions of the internal, prioritized workings of real things and of man-made things added to reality.

Secular philosophers deny the correctness of whatever religionists believe. They only ask to be left alone by those who have no business being in Earth, by their own choice. They also claim nothing suitable to a very different otherworld can be relevat to or work on Earth. Which is why their three rules must be:
Realit exists.
Seek to define mormative states--with nothing in excess, nothing lacked, first. and
Never fake reality in any way.

I am an a-theist; therefore, one who denies the possibility of 'gnosis'--mystically-inspired wisdom, or its inspiration as 'religio or "whispered otherworldly-relevant instructions".