Isn't the question "what happens after death?" available both in philosophy and religion? — dimosthenis9
It isn't really available in religion because to belong is to not question the dogma, and it's all about belonging. The function of philosophy is not to bind communities with shared values, norms, and narratives. — praxis
First people have the questions on their own a priory and after they seek the answers. — dimosthenis9
Not necessarily, some are raised within a religion and belong to it their entire lives — praxis
They may of course privately question it, but to publicly question doctrine is to risk — praxis
Whether or not that's beneficial to the individual it's not beneficial to the religion because it loses support. — praxis
many people try to answer these existential questions via religions. — dimosthenis9
You're as dogmatic as any preacher, only in the opposite direction :wink: — Wayfarer
There is indeed. — dimosthenis9
Apparently, I misinterpreted what you were asking. Maybe if I read the previous content it would have been clearer with that context. — praxis
Joshs, I think the etymology which you suggest here is incorrect. Medieval Christian writers posited ligo/ligare ("to bind", "to tie") as the constituent verb to religio, but I deny that this makes sense within the Classical or Preclassical Roman context. I think it a false etymology purposely advanced within the context of the Church and it's medieval claims of propriety over the very person of the individual Christian. Of course, Cicero and other Classical grammarians had lego/legere ("to choose", "to select"; "to collect", "to gather") as the verb, which as I noted above, makes great sense within a pre-Christian context, rendering as a meaning for religio "that which is repeatedly chosen" (referring to religious ritual, such as rendering sacrifice to the gods, or seeking direction from the augur), or "repeated convergence", "repeated coming together (as a community)". Note that the stem of lego often undergoes a morphological change when used in the derivation of other lemmas from -leg- to -lig-, depending on how the morphemes which are affixed to it effect it according to the "Latin sound laws": note that while there is no phonetically based morphological shift in ad- + lego > allego ("I admit/enroll/recruit"), there is indeed in con- + lego > colligo ("I assemble/draw together/concentrate/compress"), and in de- + lego > deligo ("I cull/pick or pluck off"). I myself feel absolutely certain that, religio < re- ("again", "repeatedly") + legor/legi (passive voice of lego/legere, and so "to be chosen/selected for doing"...the stem of course remains the same) + -io (creating the abstract result noun). I specifically do not think that religio has anything to do with "binding".Religion has its root in religio, which means binding. — Joshs
I'm curious why you're so intent on drawing a parallel between philosophy and religion. :chin: — praxis
"Possible answers" though and not "definite answers" as religion does. — dimosthenis9
‘Repeated convergence’ can work for me , not just in the sense of a convergence of individuals, but a convergence of thinking, which is a kind of binding. It captures my idea of religion as a faith ina moral constancy, a coming back repeatedly to a principle of belief. — Joshs
Religion has its root in religio, which means binding. I think what keeps today’s radical theologies from crossing over into atheism — Joshs
There was a time I believe when western philosophy declared truth (verum), good (bonum), beauty (pulchrum) as the primary objectives of (doing) philosophy. — TheMadFool
More prejudiced? Why so defensive? — 180 Proof
it's your conceptions of what we are doing (or trying to do) when we practice "religion" or "philosophy" which make no sense in the light of the historicities / genealogies of their respective roles in 'the life of the mind — 180 Proof
Okay, don't answer; or rather, your nonanswers, dimo9, persuade me my suspicions are correct. — 180 Proof
And that's an insignificant difference for you? I — praxis
Philosophy and religion have combined origins, as expressed in the history of Western philosophy. — Jack Cummins
:up:one of the possible derivations, from religare, was to bind or join [...] However the other possible derivation is more straightforward - the Latin 'religio' 'respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods; conscientiousness, sense of right, moral obligation; fear of the gods; divine service, religious observance; a religion, a faith, a mode of worship, cult; sanctity, holiness' from here. — Wayfarer
Perhaps just your average teacher of philosophy doesn't dare to say the above. because everything "Western" should be bad as we ought to be "critical", right? — ssu
Philosophy and religion have combined origins, as expressed in the history of Western philosophy. — Jack Cummins
When I studied comparative religion, one of the possible derivations, from religare, was to bind or join - as you said.
However the other possible derivation is more straightforward - the Latin 'religio' 'respect for what is sacred, reverence for the gods; conscientiousness, sense of right, moral obligation; fear of the gods; divine service, religious observance; a religion, a faith, a mode of worship, cult; sanctity, holiness' from here https://www.etymonline.com/word/religion — Wayfarer
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.