Too pollyannaish, Fool. Philosophy problematizes how rationally or not 'maps are read, made or revised'; religion is just one irrational, or fantasy, map among countless others. — 180 Proof

I don't know about you but I'm particularly fascinated by so-called saints, how each is a patron saint of a particular virtue or divine attribute- things like forgiveness, love, women, doctors, cobblers, fishermen, immigrants, and the list goes on and on - and their lives are, in some cases, living examples of these virtues/divine attributes.

Further, religious rituals are full of meaning - words uttered in prayer, the incense, the rosary, etc. all have a history that stretches centuries back in time.

Then there's the symbolism - I can't get enough of that.

If you haven't already, read Tears and Saints by E.M. Cioran.

If you haven't already, read Tears and Saints by E.M. Cioran. — 180 Proof

:up: :ok:

Here's another point of high value in this debate. If one is not allowed to make arguments then one is not allowed to be a philosopher. If one is not allowed to criticize what the human psyche considers sacred, then one is not allowed to exercise philosophy. Philosophers do not fight with swords, we use words and make progress through negativity, through the medium of the argument. Religion, though it is forced to abide by this method in our secular world, this is not the kind of world it creates. It creates a world that suppresses and kills the philosopher, a world of dogma. To prove this all one has to do is look at the actual political stances that religious philosophers take when it comes to religious legislation. Though many of them have pretended to be serious philosophers, they are actually just making use of philosophy until the time they no longer need it. As a philosopher I am beginning to wonder, is one even allowed to be a philosopher on this forum?