The Form of Religion and the Form of Philosophy

If philosophy’s process is not that of reason, if its domain is not that of objectivity, then it must struggle to distinguish itself from the form of religion. Though it might not name Gods, its concepts (its philosophical jargon) can function exactly like theology.

But what’s most interesting about this is that philosophy cannot rightly stand opposed to religion on these grounds. A philosophy that has cast away objectivity has surrendered to the subjectivity of form, base on the hedonist-choice of the individual (something that is impossible within the domain of science).

This means that one is free to choose religion over philosophy, and philosophy cannot rightly raise a complaint.

Indeed, I find the religious form far more intriguing than the philosophical form. For why do I need to read philosophy when I can read psychology, anthropology and sociology?

Of course, the authoritarianism in the religious form is far more rampant and blatant, and severe. But an aesthetic reader is in no way bound to the dangers and shallowness of fundamentalism.

If philosophy desires to collapse the world into the delusion of subjectivity then one is free to paint on the canvas of religion with their imagination. (One is free to do this anyway).

And as a form, religion is indeed special. How could I, a fierce Atheist, possibly say this? Because it’s a form that appeals to human psychology on the broadest possible scale. Because it’s a truly nihilistic form, the purest nihilistic form. It’s special because one can turn to it in states of absolute despair and still find comfort. It’s simply fairytales for adults.

Oh, I am no religious man, no prop-upper of Christianity. I am the enemy of Christianity, but I’m an honest thinker long before that. I do indeed find Christ and his message to be utterly fascinating. Why not? It’s a story, and a rather interesting story at that.

The older I get I keep on seeing through philosophy and find it more and more distasteful, but the idiosyncratic and subconsciously insane nature of religion makes the form and literature of religion all the more enticing.

You see, we should live in a world full of intelligent humans. Humans should have long ago embraced truth (science did and does), but it is still vastly in the minority given the prolific nature of human stupidity and delusion.

I realize, most humans cannot be reasoned with. They do not have the intellectual or psychological capacity. Religion comes along and slips itself into the human psyche, it attempts to influence the primate on the primate’s own incompetent terms. It even attempts to curb the impulse of the primate to some degree. (Of course, this doesn’t stop primates from using it to justify their impulse and pathology, and yes, this makes region exceedingly dangerous). But it’s also a form that humans respond to, so a higher intelligence than religion can make use of religion.

We should be beyond both the religious and philosophical form at this point, but our species is too stupid, too attached to fairytales and conceptual authority over that of careful reason.

Reason can always be murdered in the world. That won’t alter reason or destroy it in the universe, but it will leave man ignorantly stagnant.

We have already done vastly better than religion, but our psychology has not sublated its form. This is why philosophers deploy philosophical orthodoxy against science instead of engaging in a process of reason. We are still far too religious.

I long for a world of reasoning humans, but men despise reason.