Tanja asked:

I was wondering what religion and philosophy have in common? and also what makes them different
from each other. You see this is my 1st year studying religion and theology, and I'm very confused!

I was also wondering, between religion and philosophy, what is your opinion about which one is more
necessary in the new century?

============

Religion is often wrongly associated with extrinsic factors like institutional setup or forms like worship,
Holy texts, but religion is basically about ideas. Out of its ideas its institutions its behaviour and its
history flow. Religion and philosophy are both about ideas. But they are about ideas in different ways.
Broadly, religion is about ideas qua God; philosophy is about ideas qua thinking; and of course
philosophy may take up thinking in more limited ways which do not recognise the universality and
authority of reason, but subject reason to ideology and the like; but the same happens in religion, one
may become 'pharisaic' about it. But religion has to still thinkabout God and thinking in philosophy
quickly comes to recognise the universalising power of reason. So while both philosophy and religion
basically have to do with ideas, they have to do with ideas in different ways, only these different ways
soon lead back toward the other again. Philosophy and religion can't get away from each other.
Modern philosophy (since the 18th century in particular) is avowedly secular and therefore it tries to
think in a way which will steer clear of religion (of ultimate notions such as love and truth). However,
modern reasoning in ethics (of what is ordered to the good) steers even modern philosophy back
toward questions of morality (of what is right) and thereby into the central province of religion.

Philosophy without religion is trivial and vain. Religion without philosophy is ignorant and often
malignant. In the new century religion needs to rediscover its sister Philosophy, and Philosophy
needs to soften her heart to the ideas precious to religion and join forces with it.

Matthew Del Nevo

www.sicetnon.com

I believe that you are contributing to your own confusion by trying to put a barrier between religion
and philosophy. Religion is a philosophy and there is such a subject as 'Philosophy of Religion.'
There is also a related topic called 'Moral Philosophy.' Philosophy asks questions like; Can we prove
there is a God? Can it be shown that fundamental religious beliefs are true? Can it be shown that
fundamental religious beliefs are possible? Are fundamental religious beliefs justifiable? Was the
universe designed? Is it reasonable to hold fundamental religious beliefs? Are there beliefs which do
not require justification? Is it a mistake to ask for justification of fundamental religious beliefs? Is
religious belief possible?

As you will be aware, Theology is the study of God, religion and revelation. The difference between
philosophy of religion, as briefly indicated above, and the topics of theology is that the latter are part
of a philosophy which accepts by faith the existence of a god, and backs this up by a doctrine of
beliefs which calls upon witness, prophets, representatives of God on earth, etc.. Religion unwittingly
involves another facet of philosophy called 'Dualism,' which recognises a material body linked to a
separate mind or soul, in most religions the soul is believed to survive the death of the material body.
This often requires another belief, which could be argued has a metaphysical basis, and that is the
notion of a location for the soul after the death of the physical body. In the christian religion this is
called Heaven.

We could say that religious believers recognise the philosophical questions the answers to which,in a
way, can either threaten or support their faith and beliefs. However, a conviction of the truth and
authenticity of their position is sufficient to ward off any threat, and is sufficient to provide its own
supportive arguments. Seen as a philosophy in its own right a major universal religion like Christianity
is a powerful and intricate conceptual structure, based on an alleged source of divine revelation, the
Bible. There is no argument within the christian religion regarding authenticity of the texts, differences
only arise with regard to their interpretation.

Your second question about the necessity of philosophy and of religion in the new century depends
on what you mean by necessity. To ask whether one is more necessary than the other is, to my mind,
a bit like asking whether jam or marmalade is more necessary at at breakfast time. It is a simple
matter of choice. In my personal opinion both have always been needed. I am not sure why you
should single out the new century to favour one or the other. Unless, looking at it pragmatically you
contribute to the general notion that religion is, and has been for some considerable time, on the
decline. This seems true with regard to the christian religion, the general view is that churches are
emptying rapidly. However, this is offset somewhat by the increased interesting New Age religions,
but this is a subject for a separate debate.

There is a general feeling that the world is becoming more secular, seen in a swing towards material
interests, and a corresponding swing away from spiritual consciousness. There is less dependence
on the church for guidance: births, marriages and deaths are seen to involve the church less and
less. Religion is no longer a foundation for the law of the land, it no longer constitutes a deterrent for
law-breakers, nor does it provide a basis for accusation and punishment. The steady collapse of, at
least, the christian religion has to some extent undermined moral and ethical persuasion.

There is much to say for and against religion, but in view of the secular shift and what seems an
unhealthy increase in material ambition, I for one would certainly welcome some sort of religious
revival. This, of course, is where philosophy can be very valuable in keeping a focus on religious and
moral concerns, ironically, moral debate does not require a religion on which to base its tenets.

John Brandon