Agnostic.com

6 4

Religion and philosophy

Why is every religion philosophy, but not every philosophy religion?

Nobody ever died because they argued the teachings of Nietzsche compared to that of Schopenhauer.

Meanwhile the debate of whose God’s dick is bigger or interpretation at many points in history ends up with mass graves.

Vipyr82 7 Mar 11
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

6 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Can make a strong connection between Nietzsche and fascism. There's a reason his nickname is 'Nietzsche the Nazi' . Tens of millions died because of that.

Not that I want to be an apologist for Neitzsche, as he was at least mildly anti-semitic (as were most Germans of his time) but he died long before Nazism came into existence. The Nazi propaganda machine under Joseph Goebbels loved to take Nietzsche quotes out-of-context, especially his Ubermensch quotes, to support their anti-semticism and Aryan superiority claims.

@Heraclitus Not completely out of context. He advocated anti-egalitarianism, against democracy, the need for 'supermen' to rise above mediocrity and rule over the herd that is the rest of us, the glorification of war and warriors and making sure women know that there place is to push out more babies so there can be more warriors: sounds pretty fascistic to me.

@kmdskit3 I certainly understand your distaste, if not disgust, for such concepts, which I share, but consider for accuracy's sake the following:

  1. This has little to do with the historical governmental definition of fascism (or Nazism for that matter) which originated in 1915 with Fascist Revolutionary Party (Partito Fascista Rivoluzionario or PFR), which was more to the point to which I was referring. Your use of the word "fascistic" is really the modern insult definition that comes mostly from the evils of Nazism. A simple semantic evolution has occurred with the word "communist". I have heard more people called a communist than I can count. None were called a communist because they were a communist. Indeed, some were called a communist simply because they stood up for Free Speech.
  2. Most of the accusations thrown at Neitzche come from his most popular book, The Will to Power. There is just one thing wrong with this, namely, Nietzsche did not write the Will to Power. It was written by his sister Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche and Peter Gast after his death in an apparent attempt to make money off his name.
  3. Nietzsche's concept of the Ubermensch, as distinct from the later Nazi concept of the Ubermensch, had nothing to do with Aryan superiority but was directly related the vacuum of values created by the metaphorical Death of God which threatened a descent into crushing nihilism that Nietzche sought to prevent. (To paraphrase: "God is dead. We have killed him. The churches are his tomb."
  4. The Nazi notion of the master race also spawned the idea of "inferior humans" (Untermenschen) which could be dominated and enslaved. But this term does not originate with Nietzsche. Nietzsche himself was critical of both antisemitism and German nationalism. In his final years, Nietzsche began to believe that he was, in fact, Polish, not German, and was quoted as saying, "I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood".In defiance of these doctrines, he claimed that he and Germany were great only because of "Polish blood in their veins", and that he would be "having all anti-semites shot" as an answer to his stance on antisemitism. It was Nietzsche's sister Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche who actually first played a part in manipulating her brother's words to accommodate the worldview of herself and her husband, Bernhard Förster, a prominent German nationalist and anti-semite. In order to support his beliefs, he set up the Deutscher Volksverein (German People's League) in 1881 with Max Liebermann von Sonnenberg.
    So, do you really think someone called for all anti-semites to be shot is worthy of being labeled a fascist or a Nazi? Really?
  5. There are most certainly things one might criticise Nietzche for, but they should be the things he actually believed in, or at least, the things he actually said or wrote, not the distorted editings of history.
  6. Because of the distorted history that we have inherited from the trauma of WWII, the true writings of Nietzsche are seldom taught anymore, let alone appreciated. Sad.
1

I don't know that I'd say religions are philosophy, but more of an organization of people surrounding a philosophy and/or idea. Case in point, I joined the Dudist priesthood after my buddy told me he couldn't find anyone willing to perform a wedding ceremony for him and his boyfriend. The philosophy of Dudism is to abide. Basicly a modern take on Taoism. While all Dudists abide, not everyone who abides is a Dudist.

I think it's the tribalism inherent in religion that leads to the kind of conflicts you are referring to. If a tribe develops around a philosophy it becomes a religion. If it comes in contact with another tribe that is different you get conflict. It's easier for two people to agree to disagree than two tribes.

2

I think the difference is that no one is as invested in Schopenhauer for example, as in Jesus. Schopenhauer will not burn you in hell for rejecting his ideas. He doesn't demand that you attend meetings about his ideas at least once a week, sponsored by an organization that wants 10% of your income and wants you beholden to it and invested in it in a hundred other ways.

If you admit to yourself that Schopenhauer is wrong, in whole or in part, probably no one will ever know but yourself. But if you admit to yourself that the Abrahamic god is imaginary then your lack of enthusiasm for the substantial effort of keeping up appearances will eventually out you in a society where belief is the majority and highly favored position.

And as Bart Ehrman argues in his book, The Triumph of Christianity, Christianity's intolerant monotheistic exclusivity had a lot to do with its success. For thousands of years, you could be a polytheist and accept new gods without a problem. Once you became a monotheistic Christian, you had to denounce all other gods and religions. This gradually caused the death of polytheistic paganism in the Roman Empire. Also, in most of Europe, it was traditional to pay homage to the god of the tribe that defeated you in battle, but this did not mean that you gave up your old gods. Gauls and Vikings often began worshipping Jesus as just another god of many when they were defeated by a Christian army. It was only later that they were "convinced" by Christians to give up their old gods.

1

That's their fucked up attitide-my god is better than your god.

0

Because philosophy is a broader term.

3

Every religion wishes it was philosophy because philosophy is a step above religion. Philosophy, although not science, asks a lot of deep unanswered questions about the cosmos and religion wants a part of it to remain relevant. That's my take anyways.

Philosophy in its most basic terms are a set of truths and decisions based on lines of thought. Religion tends to veer toward subservience whereas philosophy is a much more open forum.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:35453
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.