More handpicked essays just for you.
Compare and contrast two religions and philosophies
The Relationship Between Religion and Spirituality
The Relationship Between Religion and Spirituality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Interpretation of Religion
Many people believe that there is one definition of religion. However, not every religion has the same beliefs. People have developed their own interpretation of religion. According to four philosophers: Otto, Marx, Freud, and Tillich, each theory is different from the other.
According to Otto’s understanding of Holy, it means “completely good” (H/R,p.2) and unexplainable or “numinous.” (H/R,p.4) Numinous experience is a deeply-felt religious experience that is found in the feeling and emotion of a person. With this feeling of emotion, it requires how you feel towards a super natural being, whether that may be God(s), Satan, Evil Spirit, etc. The mysterious belief in a supernatural being can be frightening because without a personal relationship, it can be overwhelming. This is otherwise known as “mysterium treme dum.” (H/R,p.7) Otto defines religion as an experienced feeling from a supernatural being.
According to Marx, religion comes from the imagination of the mind, “Man makes religion.” (H/R,p.11) Marx believes in Atheism and that religion is simply justification to our actions and behaviors as “followers.”
…show more content…
Atheism is the religion in which Freud believes in as well.
Similar to Marx, Freud believes humans simply make up the idea of God in explanation to things science could not disprove. Humans take relationships from our Earthly fathers and compare it to our Heavenly father. According to Freud, “Religion is an attempt to master the sensory world in which we are situated by means of the wishful world which we have developed within us as a result of biological and psychological necessities.” (H/R,p.26) Science can neither prove or disprove religion. Freud chooses to believe science and claims religion is only comforting and hopeful thinking to our purpose after
life. “Faith is the state of being ultimately concerned; the dynamics of faith are the dynamics of man’s ultimate concern.”(H/R,p.29) In depth, Tillich believes religion promises fulfillment, something we desire. After being disappointed time and time again from money, success, sports, etc. God ultimately fills our needs of happiness but demands commitment and sacrifice of these obsessions. God should be our ultimate concern. Without God we are “existentially disappointed.” (H/R,p.25) Based on the readings and discoveries these theorists have shared, I most agree with Tillich. From the descriptive point of view, he was able to give, I was able to have my own wake-up call on my faith. I spend too much time concerned on homework, and reading textbooks and communicating with classmates and teachers, but not enough time with God. Tillich explains humans who claim they are followers invest their time in materials and people. Another interpretation Tillich has discovered is that we are taking a huge risk in believing a God we cannot see and claim is there and protecting us. With enough courage to say we believe in what people call “imaginary”, we should be religiously act out as followers of God instead of religiously acting out with money, success, and materials to the extremity we do. The belief and passion we give to these materials leave us physically full-handed but spiritually and mentally empty. God is the only ultimate fulfillment of happiness. Out of all the readings, I most disagree with Marx’s interpretation. Marx is the only philosopher to not consider peoples’ beliefs about their religion. Hesitant to learning about other faiths, I wasn’t quite sure if this would be the class for me. However, in order to further my intelligence and prove why I believe in the religion I do, I needed to understand all the other religions. For example, one cannot say they dislike a food if one has never tried it. Similar in thought, I cannot claim my faith is the best one for me, without having studied others. Marx is not considerate of other religions and why people believe what they do. He only considered the series of events around him and what people he knew were religiously involved in. Based on the period of time for which he lived in, he could not see passed the way religious factory owners treated their factory workers. He compares the poor communication and relationship between factory owners and factory workers to God and his followers. Marx thinks there should be no religion at all with no scientific proof and lack of other religious viewpoints into consideration. In my opinion, religion is the belief a human being has in a God(s) or higher power. Based on this belief, religion is the sacrifice of materialistic objects and attitudes for the fulfilling and unconditional relationship with that higher power or God(s). In conclusion, each theorist has interpreted religion in many different ways. Some theories one would agree with, and some would disagree with, but ultimately, it is beneficial to beliefs that one understands all the different religions and interpretations out there. Remaining close minded can be harmful to relationships with friends, co-workers, companies, etc. Religion is a type of faith one believes in, but it is also a value. Disrespecting a value can be crucial to any one of these relationships. Even if a persons’ faith never changes, it is wise to further the knowledge of other religions and why people believe what they do.
The fear of early twentieth century dystopian writers is the fear that people in general had in this era; what is the impact of communism or what the future of religion with evolution and Darwinism would be. The may concern was that if religion was obsolete, what would replace it as the moral compass of the people. One of the most important individuals of the early twentieth century Karl Marx had his own philosophy for a replacement. The role of religion in Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto is stated as,” But Communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis…’" (Marx 19) That new bases he mentioned in the quote is the state, the new morale code that society must follow.
First, I want to identify who Marx and Nietzsche are and their critiques on religion. Karl
Both Lewis and Freud agreed that the question of god’s existence and our response must be asked. Though each man had drastically different worldviews and answers, they each sought to learn and understand the other’s worldview. Nicholi points out that Lewis may have had an advantage in the understanding of the unbeliever’s worldview due to the fact that until the age of 30, he claimed to be “even more certain of his atheism than was Freud” (2002, Pg. 81). In his adult life, Freud had no dramatic change of worldview from believer to unbeliever like Lewis had. This fact may give Lewis a slight upper hand in the understanding of the unbeliever’s worldview; however, Freud was still one of the greatest minds of his times and his work proves a strong (though negative) understanding of the believer’s worldview.
Marx argues religion acts as a drug to be more exact like opium. People who usually do drugs do it typically because it is an escape from their problems. Likewise, people typically follow a religion because it help’s them escape from their problems. Following a religion helps them to numb the pain of reality. Some people born in society have it better than others and for those who do not religion turn into a great hope for them. Additionally, Marx goes onto say religion is man made and we do not need it to survive. Furthermore, the more people have the less they tend to care about religion. For example,
Marx was born in 1818, in the then kingdom of Prussia. As a young man, he became exceedingly interested in the philosophy of Hegel. However what struck him and went on to define his work was Feuerbach’s polemic against religion. Feuerbach had said that humans needed the concept of God to satisfy an emotional need and God did not exist outside of the human mind for this very purpose. Marx applied the property of looking beyond what things seemed to be, to all spheres of life. Over the years, the essence of Marx’s work was to reveal and analyse how capitalism concealed exploitation of the proletariat and a political democracy concentrated power in the hands of a few, and not the masses.
In the first two chapter of the book, Freud explores a possible source of religious feeling. He describes an “oceanic feeling of wholeness, limitlessness, and eternity.” Freud himself is unable to experience such a feeling, but notes that there do indeed...
Pojman acknowledges that Freud’s view is purely within the bounds of psychology and Marx’s towards the bounds of sociology. These views possibly lack philosophical input. Pojman and Plantinga are not the only ones who would respond to these questions. Mackie would attempt to defend Freud and Marx because he is an all-for-atheism guy. Many others would join the conversation. As soon as the arguments begin, so does philosophy.
The word religion literally means connect again, but it also can have many meanings depending on a persons’ spiritual connection or moral outlook that governs their belief system. In the opinion of many, religion is the connection of a higher power for some, a social class for others, and a way to connection with a group who share the same views of a higher being.
Religion is defined as "the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God" . There are many recognised religions of the world, which all teach its followers to live life "the right way", whose definition varies according to the religion itself. They have some beliefs and practices that distinguish themselves from each other. Some examples are differences and similarities of Buddhism and Islam.
Where does religion come from? Many have tried to answer this question, only leaving us with more questions than answers. This essay will focus on two philosophers David Hume and Karl Marx both has strong critiques on the existence of God. Both going against the design argument, the design argument is the argument for the existence of God or single creator; however, with Hume’s empiricist and Marx's atheist they both attack the design argument in different ways, ultimately coming to the same conclusion and that is there is no God.
Erich Fromm in his psychoanalytical approach to religion is distinct from the earlier works of Sigmund Freud. Fromm defines religion as “any system of thought and action shared by a group which gives the individual a frame of orientation and an object of devotion.” Fromm argues that irreligious systems including all the different kinds of idealism and “private” religions deserve being defined as a “religion.” Based on Fromm’s theory, it is explained that there is no human being who does not have a “religious need,” almost every part of human life reflects religious need and its fulfillment, in fact he states it to be “inherent” in man.
Freud voices his opinion when he says, Freud 717). Freud challenges the existence of religion and says it is an illusion because he is more inclined to believing in scientific reason. Religion is more subjective whereas, science is more objective. That is why Freud says that religion appeals to our wish fulfillment. He says that illusions aren’t false when he uses the example of a middle-class girl having an illusion of a prince marrying her and he points out the fact that it is possible but unlikely. Freud is trying to say that the heavenly father is nothing but an illusion. To Freud religion is an “invented illusion” and science is insusceptible to illusion. Therefore, we are presented with an “expression of faith –or, rather, unfaith” when presented with the idea of “religious illusion”. There is a point where Borges reveals to readers that, (Borges 71-72). The lottery of Babylon is known to be a society that functions in secret and is absolute in authority. The Company is a figure of chance but chance is an inexorable component of life and that is why the idea of the company might seem too complex for the people of Babylon to comprehend. The lottery is an arbitrary system that has no providential logic which ties it to a kind of anti-fate. Freud presents to his readers the possibility of religion being and illusion and similarly Borges does the
Freud in his writing suggests that religion is an “illusion.” Not your typical deception of something, rather misapprehension of religion. Additionally, Freud provides brand new eyes to look at religion and its construct of civilization. He further provides evidence of his own, as well as suggesting a psychoanalytical approach to religion.
Marx saw religion as an evil that existed in society and that it brought down all the people that believed in that religion. Marx said that, ?It [religion] is the opium of the people,?[1] and in saying this, Marx meant that religion was contagious on society. Once the society had a taste for the religion, they became totally engulfed it in, and then they do not want to get out of that way of live because they see it as a good way to live. Then even if people wanted to get out of the religion it was hard to get out because the whole society had already been infected by the ?opium.?
The definition of religion is the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods(Merriam-Webster). After this semester I have come to realize that religion is a much more advanced, complicated, and personal definition. Religion can’t be defined in one word or one term because there is a lot that religion entails. There really is no concrete answer of what religion is and the definition varies among different groups of people and individuals.