Which do you think is more important, philosophy or religion?

The way I see it, religion and science both comes from philosophy in some way.

Philosophy and science > Religion.

I can use philosophy to try to convince others to feed me.
I can use religion to pray for manna from heaven or have water turn to wine.
I can use science to plow the fields, grow crops and prepare my food in a healthy manner.

My choice is clear.

But they are all important in different ways to different people.

Important to whom? Why would you believe that there is one answer?

Well, religion has left more of a mark than science or philosophy, so. . .

I wish for all of our sakes that someday that changes, because unquestionable dogma doesn’t leave much room for growth.

@LuckyGuy You appear to be confusing persuasion with “philosophy”.

Both science and religion may very well depend upon some type of philosophy. However, science relies on faith with evidence to support it. On the other hand religion relies on faith without evidence to support it. In a sense religion is a form of philosophy in itself, especially for those who are strong adherents of their religion. For me personally I’ve always seen philosophy and religion as being the same thing, except that they’re both just different ways of trying to analyze our enviroment.

Tough one to answer here considering that religion can manifest itself in many different forms as well as philosophy. I guess that I would choose the philosophy which allows me to remain a freethinking sceptical seeker.

@Paradox25 For me personally I’ve always seen philosophy and religion as being the same thing, except that they’re both just different ways of trying to analyze our enviroment.

Isn’t science that too?

Science is an incredible tool, but like all tools, it is blind to values. Its application can be ambivalently destructive or beneficial. The application of science has to be regulated by what we consider “good”. Philosophy and religion are there to answer that question.

In considering whether religion or philosophy is more important, I’d say it comes down to compassion. From where I sit, compassion is the indispensable guiding principle in moving us to do the right thing in most circumstances. The more people there are out there being guided by a robust sense of compassion, the less shitty stuff we’re liable to do, and the more our scientific gains will be put to advance our common welfare.

So which is more likely to lead to an actualization of compassion: philosophy or religion? There are plenty of examples of both doing the exact opposite, of course. They can both be perverted to serve selfish or tribal or nationalistic ends. But there are also examples—rarer by far—of philosophers and religious practitioners who have managed to get beyond the self-serving instinct and tap into a deep reservoir of compassion. But I’d propose that in doing this, those individuals transcended any distinction between philosophy and religion.

Philosophy is science, of human experience with an eye to understanding how to act in our own best, highest interests. A philosophy worth keeping will help you make decisions based on what is known about human happiness and peace of mind. And it can help you understand others.

Religion can help define what is important beyond the obvious ones expressed by instincts. It is not a mental skill or practice. Which direction should we point our big science tools ?

Science is the most important. Philosophy is not science. Science is science.

If a “philosophy” isn’t scientific then in my book it’s just a bunch of ruminations.

People mean all sorts of things by “philosophy” but in my book any useful philosophical system is the application of scientific observation to human experience and actions.
I do not suggest that philosophy is all of science, it is an example of science, applied to the human experience.

Philosophy and science can only offer conjectures on ancient and honorable questions, such as who am I and what is the universe. They do, however, offer means for the individual to attempt to answer them.

Principally, concepts would be the means with which to consider questions. For example, science often uses mathematical concepts to explain observations. Einstein is said to have sat in his armchair and imagined how aspects of reality might work. After reaching conclusions of his “thought experiments” he would then turn to mathematics to support them, often calling upon mathematicians with greater skills to accomplish this.

Philosophers have always drawn upon the scientific concepts of their day in their endeavors to understand human nature and the creation of the cosmos, developing new concepts that then were considered by other philosophers and scientists.

@Rarebear I think it’s reasonable to say that Science is a type of Philosophy, one guided by certain rules for asking questions, testing hypotheses, evaluating evidence, replicating results, meeting certain epistemic thresholds and adhering to ethical guidelines such as informed consent.

Religion too is a type of philosophy, one guided by a very different set of rules—typically determined exclusively from some religious authority (holy books, priests, shaman etc.).

Science was originally called “natural philosophy.” Philosophy is broadly the “love of knowing,” and science is a particular (and I’d argue the most effective) way of knowing stuff. But science doesn’t include logic and mathematics, which could be put under the umbrella of philosophy.

Religion, on the other hand, is just bad philosophy.

@gorillapaws When you put it that way, then I agree.

My cat is fluffy.

What @lloydbird said^^^

And how did you know your cat was fluffy? Science. : )

Cat also says, I’m fluffy therefore I am. : )

My cat is the fluffiest cat able to be conceived, therefore he must exist, and also he is God. QED.

My cat is fluffy!