News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away. Parent comment

Re:Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away by brlewis on Friday November 20, 2020 @01:35PM (#25163387)
>In most languages, "religion" will imply an ordered belief in a supernatural entity and set of accompanying practices

Buddhism is considered a religion and does not fit that description.

Your emphatic capslock notwithstanding, there's no single defining element. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away by RichardCA on Friday November 20, 2020 @02:21PM (#25163876)
> Buddhism is considered a religion and does not fit that description.

That's a can of worms. A pretty big one, actually.

https://buddhism-controversy-blog.com/2015/05/27/why-did-the...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away by jhbadger on Friday November 20, 2020 @02:05PM (#25163720)
How so? Reincarnation is every bit as supernatural as Christian Heaven, and there are accompanying practices that are supposed to influence the outcome of that via karma.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away by brlewis on Friday November 20, 2020 @02:11PM (#25163775)
I did not think impersonal entities were what the gp post was talking about; apologies if they were. But even including impersonal supernatural entities, the wikipedia page I cited shows that's not a defining characteristic.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away by mannykannot on Saturday November 21, 2020 @09:10AM (#25169819)
It does not follow, from the claim that belief in supernatural entities is not a defining characteristic of religion, that the rejection of supernatural entities is a religion. You might be able to argue that they are orthogonal issues, but then a lot of religious people would disagree vehemently with you!
[ Parent | on HN ]