/lit/ - Literature

>>14348385
Who said that?

They haven’t been for most of history. Hell, look at plato. You are supposing that modern ways of viewing the world aren’t transient.

The west has basically become an edgy neurotic lapsed catholic

>>14348446
He did

>>14348578
I don't like Spinoza.

>>14348385
It's really only protestants who see no place for philosophy in Christianity, not all of them think so but I'd wager a majority of the them to be dismissive of philosophy and rely on the Bible exclusively.

>>14348578
Dr. Gregory Sadler said he would shoot spinoza.

Because religion is dogmatic hogwash christcuck

>>14348552
no, but i wish it had

>>14348385
They are not and should not be.

>>14348385
It’s a question of epistemology.

Philosophy rests on the presupposition that man can acquire absolute knowlesge through his own capacity for reason / rationality. Rationality is an autonomous realm.

Religion posits that certainty can’t be founded in human reason alone, and thus knowledge has to be rooted in an absolute outside of himself; thus, it has to be revealed.

Religion acknowledges human reasoning capacities insofar as it is already illumined by the divine and thus not autonomous. This is foreign to modern thought that presupposes a sharp divide between the natural and supernatural.

>>14349279
This was not the case for most of history though, mostly came into christianity with protestantism and philosophy with the enlightenment.

>>14348446
Based Cacciari poster.

>>14348385
Religion is the death of philosophy.

>>14349303
Imagine actually thinking this. Wouldn’t this make plato mostly redundant since a lot of his philosophy was grounded in religious ideas? So the man mostly credited for inspiring the vast majority of western philosophy was the death of philosophy?

>>14348587
>Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

>>14349476
Just ignore fedora posters. They are the most retarded people in both science and philosophy

>>14349591
>muh bible quote
If the Bible was infallible then it would have proclaimed the necessity of Aristotelian philosophy, which all good Catholics recognize.

>>14349591
Prots would read that verse and think it's a condemnation of philosophy and not rather a misuse of it.

>>14348879
Philosphy isnt dogmatic?

>>14348587
>protestants
rent free

>>14348385
Philosophia ancilla theologiae

>>14348385
>muh non-overlapping magisteria

Daily reminder that theology is not philosophy.

>>14349591
>philosophy and vain deceit
The key is and. It is explicitly both, together.

>>14349284
It was like this in ancient Greece. In fact the opposite is what was unnatural and forced by the Christians.

>>14351325
Ah, metaphysics.

>>14348879
Getting there.

Philosophy is about questioning the world. Theology is strictly about proving god is real.

>>14351386
>Theology is strictly about proving god is real.
congrats this is by far the dumbest take i've seen from you in a while

>>14348385
Because philosophy came to the world by separating mythos and pathos
t. STEMfag attended philosophy first course

>>14349303
(citation needed)

>>14348815
Why?

>>14351395
its not him thats the old trip that got cracked

>>14351395
Why?

>>14351260
He's not wrong. Turns out when you throw away the Sacraments, Church Tradition and all the writings of the Doctors of the Church and the Saints, all you have left is the autistic interpretation of the Bible with absolutely no context 1500 years later in to form of Sola Scriptura and then you have 40,000+ denominations and autistic beliefs. Even the Orthodox haven't gone to that level of autism by a long shot.

>>14351533
https://voca.ro/1CasmM3v5JW

:3

>>14351536
Are you christian?

>>14349279
>It’s a question of epistemology.
>Philosophy rests on the presupposition that man can acquire absolute knowlesge through his own capacity for reason / rationality. Rationality is an autonomous realm.
>Religion posits that certainty can’t be founded in human reason alone, and thus knowledge has to be rooted in an absolute outside of himself; thus, it has to be revealed.
>Religion acknowledges human reasoning capacities insofar as it is already illumined by the divine and thus not autonomous. This is foreign to modern thought that presupposes a sharp divide between the natural and supernatural.

very eloquently said.

>>14351540
Yeah. I'm Catholic. I also know my faith doesn't exist in a vaccum. The Bible is only one piece of the larger puzzle when it comes to our salvation. There's other things necessary to truly be saved, like taking the Eucharist regularly in a state of grace, going to Confession regularly and receiving the Sacraments in general. Also, encountering Christ through the works of the Saints and Doctors of the Church is important to receive the graces necessary for salvation, for it is not by my will I am saved but through God's will and my permission to let him work through me.

>>14351582
>For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

>>14351582
So you’re unfamiliar with that last bit in Revelations. Or the history of how Catholicism developed from the original Christianity. ‘Kay.

>>14349624
this, the bible is basically hadiths for christians

>>14348385
They are only separate to psueds

Hermetic Syncretism The Golden Thread
http://esotericawakening.com/hermetic-syncretism-the-golden-thread

Is Dharma Fluid?
http://esotericawakening.com/is-dharma-fluid

>>14351632
>implying you know jack shit about either of those topics

you are the biggest basic bitch psued on this entire board

>>14349591
Let me give you a better one.
17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.

30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:

31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

>>14351622
St. Paul alludes to basically all that shit within the Bible. In fact the canon of the Bible wasn't completed till about the mid-300s AD, so the believers of Antiquity had to rely more on Sacred Tradition and the Sacraments than they did on the Bible per say, although homilies probably involved reading Epistles and books from the Septuagint.

>>14349624
The Papist reveals his final form

Constructing and exploring theology is an interesting exercise of the mind, but unless the religion in question provides its burden of proof, then we have no reason to consider it anything more than a fiction.

If you enjoy discussing theology and debating it with others just for the fun of an intellectual challenge then that's absolutely fine. However, you should accept that it's ultimately no different from debating the Naruto lore with someone, or trying to figure out how the hyperspace ram possibly fits into or utterly fucks up the Star Wars universe (spoiler, it rapes it beyond repair).

>>14352333
Knowledge sets you free.

>>14348385
Because in essence philosophy relies on human reason, and theology (religion) relies on authority.

>>14351622
>God forbids bacon.
>muh perpetual rule
>Christians eat bacon

You eat and drink judgment on yourselve.

>>14348815
knew that guy was an anti-semite

Have religions ever been able to give good responses to the problems of divine hiddenness and inconsistent revelation?

>>14348446
>Massimo Cacciari
Based as fuck. Rec me some books by him, anons.

Most people forget that Western philosophy is about the only area where philosophy is strictly separate from religion.
Looking at eastern philosophers, like Confucius, or (perhaps somewhat obvious) the Buddha, you'll see that their philosophy is grounded within a religious framework. Same goes for most of Middle Eastern philosophy, which builds heavily on Islamic doctrines (although exceptions are present).

>>14354204
>Most people forget that Western philosophy is about the only area where philosophy is strictly separate from religion.

ancient greek philosophy is religious...stop being an enlightenment cuck...academics will never understand

>>14354723
you seem...a bit...retarded

It isn't

Almost all philosophers are of the Christian, Jewish or Athiest(crypto jewish) tradition

>>14354723
How do you figure?

>>14348385
"He who is not pious cannot truly be wise."

>>14348815
>Hegelian
>anti-semitic and violent
Shocker.

>>14348587
That's because the reformation allows for free thought which inevitably leads to atheism.

God is dead and all but I'm pretty sure Nietzche wasn't exactly an Atheist from all the stuff that I have read of his. More so that the metaphysical world is simply more or less inconsequential than it really is. You're not going to hell for murder, you aren't going to heaven for your lifelong charity, you aren't going to purgatory because of that one time you cheated on your wife and didn't confess. You also won't get punished/rewarded for your deeds.

I am more of the belief that god is not a spiritual being but more of an omnipresent being that encompasses all living things. God is the force of nature, nothing more. Greek tragedies illustrate this picture quite a bit.

>>14355824
Literally worse than 177013. Just look at Plato's face looking at Adam.

>>14353422
But God is self-evident; the fact that the concept of God exists is, in itself, the proof of it.

>>14354071
Gnosticism
Buddhism

>>14356049
Correct. Concepts such as sin, punishment, and salvation deal explicitly with what morality should be and what the self-inflicted consequences and rewards are for obeying/disregarding morality structures. They are mandates of God in the sense that the universe is logically a creation and extension of Him as a concept.

>>14348385
Because philosophy is essentially skepticism. Philosophy branched off from ritual, and its fruit amounted only to an hesitation. Philosophy stops everything and says, "but what are we really doing? But what are we really discussing?" It does not get any farther than this. Once, or rather if, it establishes anything, it must pass the torch to action and faith. Socrates, for instance, shared the enthusiasm of his compatriots for ritual and devotion, but he cried out suddenly, right before the sacrificial knife fell on its victim, and begged the priest to explain himself--but ritual never sought to explain anything, and human civilization up until that point didn't care to have anything explained. Socrates thus gave birth to philosophy, which was in its kernel an objection to ritual, which naively viewed itself at first merely as its clarifier. It simply wanted to know why the knife was about to fall; it wanted a justification, universally cognizable, but this was of course too dangerous a question to ask and Socrates was killed for it, even though Plato never lost veneration for myth, and continually, throughout the ages, cults and scholars have been endlessly seeking the meaning of oblation and absolution, which presumably would have revealed the secret power latent in sacralized blood. They continuously assured the priests and the people that, only a minute and they would provide a theoretical basis for it all, and everyone can let out a sigh of relief, and the philosopher will have narrowly escaped the hangman's noose. In any case, many of them were not given that minute and perished at the Inquisitor's declaration in an auto-da-fé, attesting by their death that little had changed since Athens.

No, my friend, philosophy has never substituted for religion and it never will. History exhibits it as a trifle, a curiosity or a decoration; nowhere at any time have philosophers amounted to much more than an eclectic gang of homo-erotics. In the beginning they were enemies of ritual, later of the Church, later of the revolution, and today they are simply so eccentric that no one has any use for them, besides the fact that most never get anywhere because they are unable seriously to dispel nihilism and naturalism, desperate as they are in the end for appreciation and admiration; so they linger like barnacles on the hull of society, all essentially mired by quixotism, attaining little more than the self-styled, idiosyncratic artiste who has not even taken the first step away from mere individualism and ultimately has no mind for greatness or even integrity.

>>14348385
They can't be separate by principle.
Religion is, by itself and by definition, the great consideration and support of a given idea.
See the secular humanists.

>>14348385
Look at the distinctions between Religious philosophies, Philosophy of Religion, and Theology

>>14355442
Platonism is a rationalization of Pythagoreanism/Orphism

they aren't seperate, a philosopher's ideas need to be lived to be experienced fully. not a single mention of theurgy in this shit thread either

>>14356049
>>14356887
>samefagging
absolute state

>>14357232
>Someone agrees
>HAS to be a samefag
>MFW

>>14357196
How so?

>>14349476
Plato's philosophy is grounded in an exploration of fundamental problems, not "religious ideas." Assholes like you try to enter philosophy to "prove" or support whatever asinine ideology or belief system you maintain rather than engaging with the fundamental problems of your point of view and relationships with the world.

Also Plato used the available ideas around him to try to make sense of ideas, at the dawn of Western civilization. Philosophy is a living conversation, and religion has grown into a conversation that has become only about derailing conversations that challenge the propositions it insists upon, an anti-philosophical denial of inquiry.

The biggest con of religion is that it is a necessary mode of human engagement, essential to human experience rather than a mode that can and should be grown away from in favor of ones far superior to encourage personal and social discovery. The mode of philosophical inquiry is one, if every Church and temple was converted into a house of philosophical discussion and learning the world would be hugely better off. Why don't such things exist in the present? Due to out-competition by philosophical snake-oil salesmen who offer magical cures for the problems of human existence for a small monthly fee and your self-awareness.

Religion is the largest series of con games in human history, little more than a series of mechanisms for self-entitled assholes to compel others to work for them because they think they're worth everything in the world. That's what the original Egyptian pyramid scheme was about, and every other religious con game since. Religion is a political weapon and nothing more, it has no place in philosophical discussion as a participant, only as an opponent.

>>14348385
Here's the extremely rough tl;dr of academic history: First you had churches and mystery schools. These places existed to train and initiate people into their beliefs. These schools were basically the only forum for discussion of philosophy. Then later on the Christians come, and carry on the religio-philosophical union through seminaries and monasteries. But Christianity didn't have quite the same co-developmental nature with philosophy that previous religions had, so Christianity's forays into philosophy were largely just selecting people who supporting pre-accepted forms of theology. This lead to an ever widening split between theology and philosophy.

Sciences and arts then branched out of the institutions devoted to philosophic instruction. This made each "field" develop a lot of its own lingo and theories. It was harder to be someone who had knowledge of every field because of this. This has grown to an extreme in the modern era where a scientist might devote his entire life to studying the membrane on a cell in the eye of a rare breed of fish. This is "specialization." An alternative to this method of always dividing an analyzing something to gain knowledge is to do the opposite. You start with an inquiry into major, universal principles and try to apply them at lower levels. This doesn't accord well with the scientific method, so it's fallen out of favor.

My point is just that academic divisions are largely pointless. There is a big potential for overlap in music and mathematics, and there is an even bigger, unavoidable overlap between religion and philosophy, since both are fields specializing in the highest realms of reality.

>>14357582
This speculation assumes God and spiritual realities are not real.
If God is real then religion is a wholly justified phenomenon.
Of course you have not proved God is not real, its possible your speculation is mere wishful thinking.

>>14351632
>Revelations
>plural
Pick up and read, dude.

>>14357582
>little more than a series of mechanisms for self-entitled assholes to compel others to work for them
ayyyyyyy LMAO

philosophy
>understanding without any kind of bias leading to any logical conclusion
christcuckoldry
>trying to rationalize, cope, lie, and deceive yourself and others because you want to get into eternal paradise when you die after having lived like an animal for sum dozen of years
see the difference christoids? philosophy leads men to kill gods if possible. christcuckoldry leads them to live on their knees while somebody pisses into their mouth on the off chance they can maybe get something good afterwards

>>14351405
but the purpose of myth is to invoke emotion through its stories, no?

>>14348578
Spinoza did not think religion and philosophy should be separate

>>14358088
dubs

>>14356856
You seem to have fallen for the ontological argument trap.

>>14358088
>>14357582
You sure showed those religionists. Now let's post this on r/atheism for upvotes, my fellow euphorist.

>>14357007

Your point being?

>>14358088
philosophy respects different beliefs. religion is dogmatic. So religion is what kills the gods

>>14348385
Philosophy is the metaphysical delving into the rational, while religion deals with the irrational.

>>14358732
I am God. All philosophical and religious discourse should be centered on me and my love of traps like Butterfly.

>>14357582
this is some absolutely kino bait