Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Yes, they are connected, although I think it's time to separate them already.
If we leave aside the history of interaction between philosophy and religion (and it is rich, and not infrequently one was absorbed by the other), then their main point of contact is the search for the ultimate foundation (and in this sense even materialistic philosophy is religious). Religion calls him God, philosophy calls him truth, and they have roughly the same attributes, the most important of which is the limit beyond which reason cannot go.
If philosophy remains in this paradigm, it will finally turn into a religion. Fortunately, the philosophy of the last 50 years has begun to find a way out, or at least ways to circumvent this limit. I don't know what will come out of this, but the process is important and interesting, and it would be interesting to see what philosophy will be like in a hundred years, and whether it will be able to overcome its religiosity.
Definitely.
But we must remember that any religion is a philosophy, but not any philosophy is a religion.
Religious philosophy is limited by default to the accepted dogmas of religion, for which it can not get out, and almost everything comes down to these dogmas (scholasticism and sophism). This does not mean that a religious philosopher cannot overcome these limitations, but overcoming them can either reject the boundaries of dogmas, and therefore the religion itself, or… just ignore them, creating unresolved contradictions.
A striking example of the latter is such a philosopher as Nikolai Alexandrovich Berdyaev, who honestly admitted: “My philosophy is contradictory, but this is the manifestation of my thinking.”
Non-religious philosophy, on the one hand, is extremely demanding of the very” tool ” of thinking-language, on the other hand, it is free to think without any restrictions. Sometimes the conclusions of such a philosophy are ambiguous and allow for several answers, the presence of which is the realization of freedom of thought.
Therefore, a real philosopher, on the one hand, is tolerant of other ways of thinking, and on the other hand, is principled when the conclusion is made logically, reasonably and without obvious contradictions. Internal or hidden contradictions must be identified, which makes philosophy an ever-living science of thought.
The philosophy is quite diverse. Taoism is a philosophy that has become a religion. In turn, Taoism itself was generated by the cults of the Yin people who lived in China.
In Buddhism, philosophy and religion are inextricably linked and are metaphorically speaking steps with different feet. Only by walking with two legs – one (religious practice) and the other (a correct view based on the study of Buddhist theory of knowledge) can one achieve the ultimate goal of this religion – nirvana. The philosophy of Chinese Confucianism in Japan is related to the religion of Shinto, several schools of Shintoism of modern times and the Middle Ages, as well as the modern denomination of Shintoism “Shusei ha”, rely on Confucianism.
It is very difficult to determine the relationship between religion and philosophy, despite the fact that it exists. Because philosophy is present in everything, both visible and invisible. But they have a lot of differences, and above all in the fact that philosophy does not impose anything on anyone. Religion, on the contrary, is a dictate and a criminal code, two in one. Philosophy is freedom of thought and flight of fancy. In religion, a person is a slave or a slave. In philosophy, a person is always right about himself. And so on…!!! With respect.
Philosophy is a tool with which consciousness, as a combination of intelligence and feeling, tries to model the global, either justifying its activities in terms of meanings, or finding models that help to change the practice of life to a better one.
The justification option turns into a religion, requiring additional attributes for further self-deception.
Philosophy deals with the development of a universal approach to the development of situations, in this sense, it is worth asking what universal approaches to solving specific problems religion provides in its cult texts. Let's say a situation of injustice, employment, corruption, power and poverty-need. Here is the Bible's answer: Who told you to trample on my courts? Smoking is disgusting to Me. I can't stand your holiday gatherings. .. Lawlessness and celebration!
That is, the Bible specifically speaks of lawlessness along with worship. …
But further on, the Bible generally speaks of power as such: your princes chase after a bribe and are accomplices of thieves. and business … seek the truth, learn to do good, purify yourself, wash yourself, save the oppressed, intercede … then come and let us judge. And even if your sins will be … like snow, like a wave whiten.
Proverbs of Solomon and the Gospel and 1 John 3:17-19 further develop this theme: “intercede “for the voiceless … for the work of the poor and needy, “what you did to one of these little ones, you did to Jesus Christ,” and this is why we know that we are of the truth and rest our hearts before Him? “How abides the love of God in him who, even when he sees his brother in need, shuts up his heart from him?”
Those. not only is it necessary not to pass by the troubles of another person, but also, according to A. Sakhnin, one should stand up for the voiceless, even if he does not ask for anything and has not addressed this question. And here is a direct reference to the proverbs and the Book of the prophet Isaiah: save the oppressed, intercede ….So that your work reaches the needs of the most destitute and voiceless.
Here is another religious philosophy on the topic of death and the justification of righteousness in works: “a man is not justified by works,” because outwardly the work may look good, but inside it may have a mercantile color. “The kingdom of God will not come in a noticeable way … Here is the kingdom of God within you.”
In other words, not everything is the main thing that catches your eye.
Just as in this gospel text: “You are like coffins decorated outwardly, but inside you are corruption and desolation.”
For example, we can discuss the biblical approach to wisdom and listening to others: “wisdom belongs to those who consult, not to those who are arrogant and arrogant.”
But the Bible discusses another branch of human interaction: 1. if you believe, all your house will be saved, 2 .on that day there will be two people in the field, on the roof, on the bed… one person will be taken, and the other person will remain.
Just as Jesus Christ not only says “what have you done to one of these little ones”, but continues the previous meaning of the gradation of people's own / foreign: “Go away, you who work iniquity; I never knew you, for what you have done to one of these little ones, you have done to Me”.
But what is even more interesting is that the Bible speaks of freedom of choice in the following way:”I know, Lord, that it is not in the will of man to go his way, that it is not in the power of him who goes to direct his footsteps.”
But continuing the theme of retribution and choice: one fate for all … the living know that they will die, the dead know nothing, and there is no part of them in anything under the sun, in the grave where you will go there is no wisdom, no labor, no jealousy, no love.
in other words, the dead know nothing, and they have no love or jealousy for anything or anyone left on earth under the Sun …And one fate for all.
Indeed, all are equal and all will perfect their souls to make up paradise, but only: one can ascend again, but at a different time and by different steps.
Moreover, if we proceed from the fact that: it is not in the will of a person to choose his path, that it is not in the power of the person who is walking to give direction to his footsteps.
Explanation of the quote:
Jeremiah 10: 23
They are connected in the most intimate (and deepest) way. Which can be judged at least because they represent similar systems and worldviews. This is especially true of idealistic philosophy and theology. The difference between them is only in terms of concepts. In the words of Hegel (the German philosopher), philosophy is “an absolute science, the content is the same as that of religion, but in the form of a concept.”
Yes, in addition to all that, they are basically aimed at the same goal and try to implement it, albeit in slightly different ways.
Yes, these are phenomena of the same order. When a person has lost his ability to interact with the Universe, to receive knowledge directly from the world around him, he can only BELIEVE that other people are broadcasting to him, including such people who, without any reason, have appropriated the right to speak on BEHALF of God
Many philosophers identify philosophy with religion. And they call it, by the way, spiritual philosophy. Russian literature has just perfectly absorbed the features of spiritual (in particular) Orthodox literature. For example, the work “The Brothers Karamazov” by F. M. Dostoevsky tells us about important philosophical questions: what is the meaning of life? Who is God? Why is our world created this way?
In addition, both religion and philosophy deal with the same issues:
– genesis
Both philosophy and religion are based on the same root – the worldview. Philosophy expresses its views and tries to understand its surroundings, religion knows everything and trades its “knowledge”. Religion has something to trade, it has a worldview accessible to the masses, formed, decorated with gold. In philosophy, the worldview is subjective, so each philosopher with his own view, although he claims to be universal (which is gradually becoming more and more utopian), but does not find many supporters. It turns out that religious fantasies give people something, they are even willing to pay for myths, and philosophy, which has a halo of greatness and wisdom in society, can give almost nothing, or rather can not give the vast majority, it gives only those who are in search of themselves, helps such people to take place, to feel solid ground. People often expect philosophy to help solve practical problems, but alas, with all its greatness, it is powerless here – philosophy is the sphere of the spirit and serves only the spirit, it affects practice only indirectly, through raising culture.
religion cannot exist without philosophy. Of course, there were atheist philosophers. But there were no religious thinkers without philosophy. Even Asian, Egyptian, or … And why “even”? All cultural religions converge to the Abrahamic ones. They are all about life, and life is a philosophy.
The question is relevant, but it should be expanded to include all forms of spiritual life – science, religion, morality, art, and law… and philosophy. Each of these forms speaks a different language. Science-in the language of logos, subject concepts and laws. Art – in the language of tropes, or metaphors. Religion-in the language of mythologies and symbols. Morality-in the language of axiological norms and values. Law-in the language of nomos, normative laws. And philosophy? And philosophy is meta-physics (epistemology), meta-morality (ethics), meta-art (aesthetics), meta-religion (philosophy of religion)… i.e. something that stands above all of the above. Therefore, philosophy serves as an interpreter between all of them. Here is such an unenviable, and maybe high role for her.
In essence, they are not connected, except for the fact that they are based on one basis-the spiritual needs of a person. The basis of religion is faith in God, and only one opinion is important for believers-the opinion of God, which is recorded, for example, in the Bible. Religion is stable, unlike philosophy. God is not interested in what a person thinks about a particular issue. He is the source of wisdom and already knows all the answers to all the questions. Philosophy is a science invented by people (most likely those who are not satisfied with the answers from God and decided to look for answers to spiritual questions themselves). Its essence is a human view of life's issues and situations, including spiritual ones: what is the meaning of life? If in religion the answer is obvious to the question of what is the meaning of life and who is God, then in philosophy there is a constant search for an answer to these questions and it is still uncertain (which in principle is logical why). A person tries to find answers to life's questions with his mind, avoiding God, who can help in this. In my opinion, this is absurd and therefore meaningless. This is the fundamental difference between religion and philosophy. (Philosophy – in my opinion, this is not even a science, but a continuous chatter with interspersed scientific terms to give the appearance of solidity and knowledge of the case. It's not science either, because it doesn't do any good at all, but psychology or logic is another matter – they are at least of some use.) On this basis, I can be considered an active opponent of philosophy 😁
God is consciousness. He created people and controls them by changing their forms of consciousness. The most inclusive (tat – top) forms of consciousness are knowledge and faith. They do not contradict each other, and the form of consciousness Faith is a phase of pre-understanding. Philosophy is also a form of consciousness – what we know and think about something. On the site * Aryan analytics*. World Tatar / Bulgarian / linguistic classifier.
Philosophy and religion are twins and brothers. Religion grows out of philosophy, and philosophy is the basis for religion.The difference among them is that religion, at present, draws from faith income and not bad. Philosophy – – – is selfless!!!