Lets look at the relationship between philosophy, religion and science. It is best to clear the semantics first since the meanings of words can become blurred in the process of winning arguments. Science is a collection of conclusions based on the scientific method. The scientific method is the process of using strict criteria for experiments to get repeatable results with tangible things. Philosophy is the study of hows and whys, or the intangible things; this would include questions of existence, why things are and where they should be heading. Religion is the branch of philosophy that deals with questions about a higher power or the driving force behind it all.

Philosophy supersedes science. The scientific method is one philosophical approach to studying objects and theories. Philosophy is also the way we determine the use of scientific facts and theories that we discover. For instance, Hitler felt his desire to clear the human gene pool of Slavic and Jewish genes was scientific. We don’t throw out genetic science because his philosophical application was diabolical. It is a little know fact that many tried to do so after the war. Our philosophies determine the use of science in the same way our philosophies influences how we drive a vehicle. The mechanics always stay the same but using it wrong can have damaging effects. It is common today, as in those times, to try and equate one’s philosophy with science in order to appear credible.

A person’s philosophy can lean toward naturalism with the goal of harmony in the earth’s ecosystems. It can have a negative view of man and want to use science to minimize his effect on the earth. One humanistic approach could put man in the forefront as the earth’s steward. Another might go further and say the earth exists to give happiness to mankind and should only be preserved for that means. Each philosophy has an extreme application and can become detrimental to mankind and unjust. Each one will claim to have a solid scientific basis.

Religion comes out of one’s philosophies about authority and a higher power. We see this throughout history. Even if someone considers the higher power a loving creator of everything, they may or may not value other humans more. A humanist may have destructive philosophies as well as we said earlier. This is an area of broad applications because it can be used wrongly in the same way as science can be used for diabolical means. A person can have a strong faith in God yet be a good scientist. In the same way an Atheist can be a good scientist. It is how they apply the science for the good of man that is important. An organized religion will have a mixture of good and bad philosophies. As we mature, we learn to sort them out. A person who wants to discredit another philosophy will always showcase the worst cases. An Atheist will point to religious wars while a Deist will point to communist deaths and the French Revolution as examples of godlessness. But in the end, they will all have certain philosophies, good and bad and will claim to hold the only true science and true belief in the existence or absence of a higher power.

Everyone has a sense of justice within themselves. The fact that everyone shares the desire for equality and respect hints toward the existence of some kind of common spirit that we all share. This is called natural law and it can be corrupted by circumstance and abuses. When we say someone has lost his way, that is what we are referring to. We use this natural sense when confronting religious dogma and off base philosophies. That is why many make the claim that they don’t follow any man or organized group. It means simply that they will not be compliant to those who violate natural justice. Justice means equality in transactions whether they are emotional or material. We call a person with this courage and drive someone with good character.

I ascribe to a personal Christian view of higher authority because it makes more sense when applied to unknowns. Concerning origins, single cells are too complex to have come into existence by a chance static and protein encounter. Something intelligent had to organize the molecules to do those complex things. The idea of a loving God who values human life is also a solid basis for good philosophy toward fellow humans. I hate when it is presented with meanness and dogma. Most organized groups, in order to increase loyalty, require their members to agree on certain dogma and statements. Some leaders are interested in manipulation and enriching themselves by making dependents. I like the flexibility of being my own person concerning religious beliefs since I am the only one in the end who will answer for them. I have a lot of respect and interest in other people’s philosophical beliefs. I won’t change someone’s life stories and ridicule them. Neither will I be that way toward their beliefs. The only time I would challenge someone is if their beliefs violate natural rights and justice. At times I have beliefs that need challenged too and when the challenge comes from from people who are respectful and have good character, I listen closely.