the title says it all.

my own opinion, at the moment, is that religion doesn't necessarily depend on believing in a god or gods... or necessarily any higher power. but then i don't know exactly what the difference between religion and philosophy is. perhaps they're complimentary, because they both have the same scope (to find truth) but they take different (or are they so different?) approaches. or is the approach the same while the starting points are different? what does it mean to be religious?

Unfortunately, I don't think they have much to do with each other. They really should, but there are many religions that depend on people not questioning too much into relgion or philosophy.

Perhaps the starting points are the same:
Why am I here? Where did it all begin?

But the outcome and goals are different.

are the goals so different? i'm not so sure. i think it's the starting point, i.e. the method to the madness, that is different. like both religion and philosophy say "for something to be true it must come from this idea" (god, logic, etc).

and why do you say unfortunately? what's so unfortunate about religion without god? religion's really just a way of saying "it's just like that because it is" when philosophy fails. the beauty is that as time goes forward, philosophy exposes more and more and religion has to make up for less and less.

if someone knows the etymology of the word religion and cares to share, feel free. otherwise, i'll get around to finding it, nailing down its definition and then we can discuss more in depth what being religious really means.

Isn't religion really something embedded in a persons being ?
The need to answer to something greater then yourself ?
To be part of something with like minded people ?

And sometimes even not to be alone but to share ?
Mankind is a herd animal usually traveling in packs .
Why should that be different with religion .

i love you dutchgothdiva.

i like where you're going with that. if you could elaborate on that any further, i would appreciate it greatly. i agree that religion has more to do with society than the individual, but feel incapable of making that clear through argument. if you could give it a shot, that would be great. otherwise, i'll give it some thought.

Well taking away all icons and ideals...

a religon is a way to justify your own personal belifes and with those belifes challange the world to become somthing more, also theres a moral side to showing what you think is wright and wrong and why.

Its basicly the most simple attempt of sorting out good and evil and making some sort of order, like our governments do.

The problem being of coure that not every one agrees with eachother and larger more powerful religons force there ideals on others, in more recent times you can see the same thing in governments,

but since religons ultimaily are more powerful than governments they tend to stick around longer.

Meaning than religond is how me show most bascily what we belive in.

If you have problems relating government and religond just look at the crusides and rome, then comare it to Hitlers nazie war and the cold war

also i would like to add that unlike Government that religons still exist in Ancrhy governments cannot hence the "dark ages"

The best description I've heard is that Philosophy is what people think while Religion is what they believe.

There are various eastern religions that have no divine being at the centre of them.
(stuck for examples at the moment).

Philosophy is a science...

There are many philosophies that support the theory of a divine being...unfortunately, those philosophies are easily counter-argued.

Perhaps the most justified theory in a philosophical context pertaining to a higher-being is synonymous with aestheticism. There is no beauty nor ugliness; there is no good, nor evil; there is no right, nor wrong. There just is. And in taking that approach, applying any sort of bias to (what philosophers dub) as a "necessary being" (that which was first) is unjustified. Simply put, the "necessary being" doesn't even have to be a being at all (that is, any sort of entity or physical body)...it's just that which is and always will be (which is easily justified in a metaphysical context). What exactly it is, is questionable. But philosophers will agree on one fact, it is impossible for said being to be sentient. For such a being to be self-aware places a bias on it. And as such, I agree with the philosophical notions pertaining to existence. There is no such thing as "non-existence." There only is. Ergo, existence is quite possibly the answer to it all. But, not many people like that answer...but it's hard to counter-argue philosophically.

slightly off-topic, but how can you really assert there is no such thing as non-existence? wouldn't it be more proper to say non-existence doesn't exist?

We've been through this already Apostate...and we know how one another speaks. And if you want to get into the nitty-gritty of it, then yes, my symantics are arguable.

But this isn't the philosophy section (although this topic would've done well there) and I was merely being brief and simple for the sake of the discussion. No need to bust out the Pre-Socratics here...

lol sry

they are both inspirations by the mind to, ideally better humanity rather than relishing in that which keeps us on the level of any other lawless mammal, they're so close because both are manifestations of people's thoughts.

maybe presentation?

philosophy is studied with a supportable history of others who've had similiar thoughts, presenting those ideals in an academic way...religion is something individually idealized, based on the unsupportable thoughts of others who've had experiences and chose to relay those to others, sometimes in less academic ways.

on a religious level, i've always needed to believe in something else, my understandings are through those avenues that i've learned from, i approach religion as from belief, not necessarily rational or scientifically proven thoughts, i ponder the who and why rather than what and where, and why for me religion is a religion, not a philosophy, but i do think a lot about religion and enjoy discussing it with others.