Typologies of the world view: mythology, religion, philosophy

     Definitions of religion:

      Religion has been defined in a wide variety of ways. Most definitions attempt to find a balance somewhere between overly sharp definition and meaningless generalities. Some sources have tried to use formalistic, doctrinal definitions while others have emphasized experiential, emotive, intuitive, valuation and ethical factors. Definitions mostly include:

• a notion of the transcendent or numinous, often, but not always, in the form of theism
• a cultural or behavioral aspect of ritual, liturgy and organized worship, often involving a priesthood, and societal norms of morality and virtue
• a set of myths or sacred truths held in reverence or believed by adherents

     Sociologists and anthropologists tend to see religion as an abstract set of ideas, values, or experiences developed as part of a cultural matrix. For example, in Lindbeck's Nature of Doctrine, religion does not refer to belief in "God" or a transcendent Absolute. Instead, Lindbeck defines religion as, "a kind of cultural and/or linguistic framework or medium that shapes the entirety of life and thought… it is similar to an idiom that makes possible the description of realities, the formulation of beliefs, and the experiencing of inner attitudes, feelings, and sentiments.” According to this definition, religion refers to one's primary worldview and how this dictates one's thoughts and actions.¹³

The main religions are: Buddhism (VI - V in. BC), Christianity (I in. AD), Islam (VII in. AD).

As for me, the religion is very important part of our life. Many people trust in this belief and cannot live without it.

        Philosophy of religion is a branch of Philosophy concerned with questions regarding religion, including the nature and existence of God, the examination of religious experience, analysis of religious language and texts, and the relationship of religion and science. It is an ancient discipline, being found in the earliest known manuscripts concerning Philosophy, and relates to many other branches of Philosophy and general thought, including Metaphysics, Logic, and History. Philosophy of religion is frequently discussed outside of academia through popular books and debates, mostly regarding the existence of God and problem of evil. The Philosophy of religion differs from religious Philosophy in that it seeks to discuss questions regarding the nature of religion as a whole, rather than examining the problems brought forth by a particular belief system. It is designed such that it can be carried out dispassionately by those who identify as believers or non-believers.¹⁴

       I think that mythology and religion are the earliest forms of ideology that precede Philosophy. If mythology represents an attempt to explain the world in the form of images, and the religion appeals to the supreme power, the Philosophy has its philosophical function on the basis of theoretical relations and reality, proposing a system of categories and laws that allow the world to know the most common and principled terms.

  These are questions that everyone should ask themselves at some point. This site attempts to demystify the Philosophy of religion, and so to help people to reach views on these questions.

Is There a God?

    The first section of the site, Arguments for the Existence of God, explains the classic arguments for a positive answer to the question “Is there a God?” The debate concerning God’s existence has, of course, been going on for millennia. That does not mean, however, that no progress has been made. Some of the classic arguments for God’s existence have been largely abandoned, others have been refined, and new arguments or points about arguments do regularly appear. The search for an answer to the question of God’s existence should not be written off as futile simply because the question is an old one.¹⁵

If there is a God, then what is He Like?

   If they are successful, then none of the classic arguments for God’s existence proves exactly the same thing. The ontological argument, for instance, purports to prove the existence of a perfect being; the cosmological argument purports to prove the existence of a necessary or eternal Creator; the teleological argument purports to prove the existence of a Creator concerned with humanity. Each of these arguments, then, bears not only on the question of God’s existence, but also on the question of his nature, of what he is like.

    The same can be said of many of the arguments for atheism, explained in the second section of the site. Many of these arguments seek to exploit a perceived incoherence in the traditional doctrines concerning God’s nature, raising questions as to how those doctrines are best formulated. The challenge “If God is just, then how can he also be forgiving?”, for instance, has led theists to understand both God’s justice and his forgiveness in ways that can be reconciled. The challenge “If God is all-knowing, then how can our choices be free?”, for instance, has prompted a similar approach to divine omniscience and human freedom. The arguments for atheism, then, no less than the arguments for theism, influence the way that theists conceive of God, so contribute to the project of answering the question “If there is a God, then what is he like?”

What Does that Mean for Us?

    The third question, “What does that mean for us?” - is asked less often than the previous two, and so is covered less explicitly by this survey of the Philosophy of religion. What follows is admittedly an oversimplification, but is, I think, an accurate representation of common responses to this question.

  The implications of classical theism, if it is accepted in all of its details, are clear enough: If God exists then we were created for a purpose; we are valued, loved. If God exists then we also have an incentive, not to mention a moral duty, to fulfill this purpose; our eternal fate hangs on whether we follow God, as we were created to, or rebel against his authority. Classical theism is therefore often felt to restrict our freedom, but to do so not because we are unimportant but rather because we are important and so have a duty of care to ourselves and to others. Theism thus affirms our value even as it constrains our freedom.

    Atheism, plausibly, exerts pressure in the opposite direction: it affirms our freedom but, it is often thought, threatens to compromise our value. In general, those who have lacked belief in a next life have thought that this makes our choices in this life all the more important. Sartre, for instance, thought that the absence of a divine Creator who defines who we are gives us absolute freedom to define ourselves. Because there is no God, there is no God-given human nature, and so each of us is, in a sense, his own Creator. We are free to be who we want to be.

    Atheism has also, rightly or wrongly, been associated with a pessimistic view of human value. If we were not placed here on purpose, but are the accidental product of random processes, and if we came from the dust and will return to it, then in what sense are we important? There are, broadly speaking, two ways to respond to this question. Atheists can, on the one hand, argue that value is about what we are, rather than why or how we got here. They can thus affirm that we are special despite our inauspicious origins. Or they can, on the other hand, accept that we have no special value, but argue that it is better to reconcile oneself to this fact than it is to deceive oneself with religious belief.¹⁶

        I believe that religion has taken its present form in order to control people and their beliefs, into a system of "power over people", where the few rule over the many. Where the few control the mindset of the many in order to keep people away from insight, knowledge and freedom to seek whatever way in life one wants to pursue. And in order to raise men to power, where they themselves are almost perceived as gods in the form of priests and the likes. We need only to study a bit of history, to see how the most popular religions today: have a history of violence and murder, destruction of different cultures, removal of ancient texts of knowledge, the burning of people at the stake and the enslavement of people to work for the so-called religious people, in order to once again, keep the few in power over the many. 
 

PHILOSOPHY – understanding this world from position of experience, reason and knowledge. It appeared as need to know real world in through it generalisation. Philosophy coincides with the world outlook.¹⁷ 

   Philosophy is the systematic study of the foundations of human knowledge with an emphasis on the conditions of its validity and finding answers to ultimate questions. While every other science aims at investigating a specific area of knowledge, such as physics or psychology, Philosophy has been defined as “thinking about thinking.” At the same time, as expressed by its Greek etymology, Philosophy is the love to wisdom. Traditionally at least, it is not the pursuit of knowledge for knowledge’s sake, but rather the attempt to discover the meaning and purpose of existence, including through intellectual means, but including also self-reflection, discipline, and religious practice and inquiry. Though the term Philosophy is of Western origin and implies a kind of investigation typical of western culture, it has its equivalents in the various other cultures of the world, notably India, China and the Middle East.

     Philosophy may also refer to a general worldview or to a specific ethic or belief that can be utterly unrelated to academic philosophical considerations. This meaning of the term is perhaps as important as the classical definition, because it affects each human being. Virtually everyone, knowingly or unknowingly, lives and operates based upon a set of values and beliefs that are often unexpressed and even unconscious. As a result, the may easily be incompatible and contradictory, leaving those who maintain them with a sense of uneasiness. If a man professes that “only money counts in life,” this is a philosophical stance. However, it is most likely to be at odds with other convictions held by that same individual, such as a secret passion for art or love for his family.¹⁸                                    .  
       Identifying the specifics of philosophical knowledge suggests a study of various forms of mastering a man of reality. In addition to the practical reality there are other ways normative explanations, which are enshrined in the form of appropriate forms of public consciousness. Each of these forms has its own set of categories: in science - this is, above all, truth in religion - faith in political ideology - the power of law - justice, in Philosophy - wisdom.  
Philosophical knowledge - knowledge that "a single universal", it differs from knowledge of individual items. Philosophy is characterized by the fact that the means justified its borders through which people explain the world. What is the specificity of scientific and philosophical thinking?  
       First of all, scientific thinking specifically, embedded in clear boundaries of the science subject. Philosophical thinking is implemented on the basis of comparisons, comparisons, transitions from one area to another. Scientific thinking is part of the specific rules of science. It clearly is programmed rules of scientific research. In my opinion, philosophical thinking is subject to the rules of logic and look healthy, that is programmed not so clearly as the scientific.  
       Scientific thinking is implemented on the basis of scientific concepts, philosophical - based on philosophical categories that are not so clear as scientific. It was such "ambiguity" philosophical categories allow them to help determine the direction of scientific search in those situations where scientific concepts do not work. Philosophical thinking related to the purpose and values formation, scientific - already realizes its objectives, purpose or value system. Science answers the questions why and Philosophy - to the questions: why, why? Scientific thinking is free from any - or manifestations that characterize the attitude of man towards peace. As part of the reality of science is in the form of an object. Philosophical thinking reflexive, it has drawn not only to the object, but also in the process of his study.                                       . 
     Reflex - a special phenomenon in the spiritual development of man of peace, which does not coincide with knowledge. The subject of reflection - the ratio of domestic to the outside world.  
The Philosophy and science are identical in structure and varied in subject and functions. And philosophical and scientific knowledge consists of elements (of judgment, concepts, principles, laws, hypotheses, etc.) which are organized into the system, abide by the laws of logic and form their own theoretically designed peace. In this sense Philosophy serves as science.  
However, if science is an object which is seen as natural and historical phenomenon, the subject of philosophical studies is a theoretical model of human relations to world peace and to humans. Philosophy in all cases is a reflexive system, which includes the subject of study twice - as a researcher and as an element of philosophical reflection. In Philosophy, as in the form of worldview, the world before it holistically, found a place man, his interests, and value orientations. Science structure makes no philosophical outlook of science; therefore, subject to study Philosophy is not a science.                                              .  
      The Philosophy and science unites the desire for reliable knowledge, rational explanation to the world. But I think, if science is associated with the pursuit of truth, the Philosophy of reliability complemented by elements of persuasion. In other words, the merger occurs in Philosophy knowledge and belief. And the laws allow science to predict what will object. On the basis of philosophical principles can be used to predict only way, exploring ways to study the phenomenon. This fact indicates the difference between Philosophy and science at the same time, their tough relationship. Science can not thrive without a Philosophy, which serves the functions of the methodology and Philosophy.¹⁹

   Philosophy, I think, plays may be not so main role, but it is important thing for us to pays attention when we want to know what is going on around us. I follow this position that initially we need to study theory then use it in practice. If we learn core questions about our surrounding reality with society, existing laws and principles we will be able construct our existing way in this hard world.