It’s the intolerance that’s the tricky part.

It was low quality and unphilosophical.

Who decides what is philosophy and what is not philosophy?

The good news is, they were discussing how the bible substantiates alien abductions on the radio today, instead of why religion is racist for depicting Jesus as a white person, which was a heated topic for several weeks. So things are definitely starting to return to normal.

Who decides what is philosophy and what is not philosophy? — Wheatley

I already know the answer. Anything that isn't academic philosophy is not philosophy.

The mods, obviously, but I think your actual question is "what are the criteria for philosophy?", and I think the answer to that is "is it just expressing an opinion or is it giving some kind of thoughtful reason why one viewpoint is more correct than another?"

I don't think the term "annoying" is going to be taken seriously as philosophy.

That's not my problem. I believe "annoying" is accurate, and it doesn't matter how vulgar you think that word is.

It's not a matter of vulgarity, because "annoyed"is not vulgar. The fact that you are annoyed is a psychological fact, a fact about you as a person, not about religion as an institution. If you want to phrase it philosophically it would be more like "Is religion on the whole positive or negative for mankind?" Something speaking more to the universal than to your own mental state.

That makes sense.

If you want to phrase it philosophically it would be more like "Is religion on the whole positive or negative for mankind?" — Olivier5

Perhaps another time. The quarantine is getting to me.

It's been more than two months for me now (Italy).

'merica.