Now, its clear that some thoughtful types have pondered (apols Russell) the differences and similarities between philosophy and religion.
Check out Religion vs Philosophy for more.
One thing that has struck me (and I blame myself for being so gullible) is that philosophers don't execute the gullible if they don't 'get' or agree with what they say, and I'm pretty sure too that advocates of philosophy don't seek out the gullible and kill them, or ask them to resign their positions in case of disagreement.
So, might the difficulties that Dr Rowan Williams has encountered be because he has approached his subject philosophically rather than religiously? This means that he's been 'gullible' rather than irrelgious so why don't those that disagree with him let him off the hook? if you see what I mean...
No comments:
Post a Comment