….what do you think? — Jamal

Generalizing, we can say that philosophy is critical: critical of prevailing beliefs, certainly fanatical or fundamentalist beliefs, but perhaps more importantly, beliefs that seem obvious. — Jamal

Generalizing even further, philosophy is—or is part of—enlightenment, a means by which humans are freed from domination, whether by nature, myth, religion, governments, whatever it happens to be: — Jamal

Enlightenment, understood in the widest sense as the advance of thought, has always aimed at liberating human beings from fear and installing them as masters.
— Adorno & Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment — Jamal

Enlightenment, understood in the widest sense as the advance of thought, has always aimed at liberating human beings from fear and installing them as masters. Yet the wholly enlightened earth is radiant with triumphant calamity. — Adorno & Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment

Generalizing even further, philosophy is—or is part of—enlightenment, a means by which humans are freed from domination, whether by nature, myth, religion, governments, whatever it happens to be:

Enlightenment, understood in the widest sense as the advance of thought, has always aimed at liberating human beings from fear and installing them as masters.
— Adorno & Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment — Jamal

But some philosophy points not to upward dialectic of Man but of the inherent perennial suffering nature of existence. See: Schopenhauer (suffering Will), Kierkegaard (angst), Siddhartha Gotama (dukkha), Hartmann (social despair), Mainlander (cosmic suicide), Zapffe (over-evolved self-awareness), E.M. Cioran (resigned indifference, disappointmentism), etc. etc. — schopenhauer1

As we move through cultural history, we are given more chances for sophisticated reflection of the intractable problems of human existence. — schopenhauer1

Philosophy has been questioning religion from the start — Jamal

For me as a layperson, there's philosophy I can use or learn from and philosophy for academics who relish jargon saturated, recondite deliberations about thinkers so intricate or verbose, no one can seemingly agree about the correct reading of their work. — Tom Storm

And religion has been questioning religion from the start. The formation of new religions typically carry with them an implicit critique of older established ones ( Protestant reformation, Conservative, reform and reconstructionist Judaism, etc). Meanwhile, the history of Western philosophy has mostly consisted of questioning one religious metaphysical system in order to prepare the ground for a different religious metaphysical system. — Joshs

I don’t have a specific question except: what do you think? — Jamal

Enlightenment, understood in the widest sense as the advance of thought, has always aimed at liberating human beings from fear and installing them as masters. — Adorno & Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment

Against the common view that philosophy is a two-thousand-year-old failing enterprise, a body of thought that has produced no knowledge, couldn’t we say that philosophy has in fact done pretty well in bringing dominant beliefs into question, revealing their incoherence or baselessness, or just submitting them to rational enquiry? — Jamal

Btw, philosophizing began for me in encounters with (raw) stupidity of other teens and adults, then authority figures and institutions, finally profound failures and missed opportunities I'd discovered throughout the histories I'd studied. Recognizing stupidity as endemic to the human condition was my initial existential crisis (i.e. despair) at 16/17 from which, over four decades later, I've still not recovered. — 180 Proof

And religion is hellbent on making human beings as dependent as possible, necessarily limiting their moral development and any other sort of development that would result in more independent thought and action. — praxis

That's not always true. — frank

So, is a persons claim that they are a religious philosopher, the inevitable beginning of losing/rationalising away, their [own] religion? — universeness

In an address before the United States Congress, Pope Francis included her in a list of four exemplary Americans who "buil[t] a better future".

The Catholic Church has opened the cause for Day's possible canonization, which was accepted by the Holy See for investigation. For that reason, the Church refers to her with the title of Servant of God. — Wikipedia

Hardly seems at odds with the church in any way. Can you explain? — praxis

religion is hellbent on making human beings as dependent as possible, necessarily limiting their moral development and any other sort of development that would result in more independent thought and action — praxis

That doesn't make sense. — praxis

Generally speaking, a good exemplar would think and/or act in a way that demonstrates independence. If you're suggesting that fighting for women's suffrage somehow defied the church, then you appear to be wrong. — praxis

Maybe. I think it's more likely, however, that a "religious philosopher" is an apologetic critic of naturalism, irreligion and/or religions (or sects) other than her own. — 180 Proof

She's the representative of religion here. She worked to help emancipate minorities. — frank

Real question: where did you first learn about Dorothy Day? — frank