Philosophy and religion

Is it possible, in the final analysis, for one human being to achieve perfect understanding of another?
We can invest enormous time and energy in serious efforts to know another person, but in the end, how close can we come to that person’s essence? We convince ourselves that we know the other person well, but do we really know anything important about anyone?”
― Haruki Murakami, The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle

Two years ago, I wrote this post where I argued that those goddites who resort to philosophy to justify their delusions beliefs are not doing philosophy. I am not changing my mind on the above thesis. I still believe that I was right then. You may want to ask what I think of philosophy of religion? It’s a waste of intellect. It is no different from studying theology. You waste both your time and money to learn nothing except what the priest says god says.

The end of philosophy is to arrive at truth, that is, to arrive at what is true/ real. The aim of religion is to have faith, more faith. It is not concerned with what is true, rather with what is believed.

The goddite is not interested in what is true. Religion is based on revelation. If the evidence, or lack of, cannot be found in revelation, it can’t be found anywhere else. The goddite like Platinga, WLC and all those sophisticates who have a modeled a career around apologetics, are not doing philosophy justice. Instead of spending time attempting to answer the big questions of life, they keep us occupied with telling them their arguments in defense of ghosts do not further the cause of ghosts an inch. They remain just where they began, as creations of the mind.

You can skip the whole of this post and watch Carl Sagan. I hope this message hasn’t come too late for most of you.

You are an aperture through which the universe is looking at and exploring itself.”
― Alan W. Watts