Why is every religion philosophy, but not every philosophy religion?
Nobody ever died because they argued the teachings of Nietzsche compared to that of Schopenhauer.
Meanwhile the debate of whose God’s dick is bigger or interpretation at many points in history ends up with mass graves.
Can make a strong connection between Nietzsche and fascism. There's a reason his nickname is 'Nietzsche the Nazi' . Tens of millions died because of that.
Not that I want to be an apologist for Neitzsche, as he was at least mildly anti-semitic (as were most Germans of his time) but he died long before Nazism came into existence. The Nazi propaganda machine under Joseph Goebbels loved to take Nietzsche quotes out-of-context, especially his Ubermensch quotes, to support their anti-semticism and Aryan superiority claims.
@Heraclitus Not completely out of context. He advocated anti-egalitarianism, against democracy, the need for 'supermen' to rise above mediocrity and rule over the herd that is the rest of us, the glorification of war and warriors and making sure women know that there place is to push out more babies so there can be more warriors: sounds pretty fascistic to me.
@kmdskit3 I certainly understand your distaste, if not disgust, for such concepts, which I share, but consider for accuracy's sake the following:
I don't know that I'd say religions are philosophy, but more of an organization of people surrounding a philosophy and/or idea. Case in point, I joined the Dudist priesthood after my buddy told me he couldn't find anyone willing to perform a wedding ceremony for him and his boyfriend. The philosophy of Dudism is to abide. Basicly a modern take on Taoism. While all Dudists abide, not everyone who abides is a Dudist.
I think it's the tribalism inherent in religion that leads to the kind of conflicts you are referring to. If a tribe develops around a philosophy it becomes a religion. If it comes in contact with another tribe that is different you get conflict. It's easier for two people to agree to disagree than two tribes.
I think the difference is that no one is as invested in Schopenhauer for example, as in Jesus. Schopenhauer will not burn you in hell for rejecting his ideas. He doesn't demand that you attend meetings about his ideas at least once a week, sponsored by an organization that wants 10% of your income and wants you beholden to it and invested in it in a hundred other ways.
If you admit to yourself that Schopenhauer is wrong, in whole or in part, probably no one will ever know but yourself. But if you admit to yourself that the Abrahamic god is imaginary then your lack of enthusiasm for the substantial effort of keeping up appearances will eventually out you in a society where belief is the majority and highly favored position.
And as Bart Ehrman argues in his book, The Triumph of Christianity, Christianity's intolerant monotheistic exclusivity had a lot to do with its success. For thousands of years, you could be a polytheist and accept new gods without a problem. Once you became a monotheistic Christian, you had to denounce all other gods and religions. This gradually caused the death of polytheistic paganism in the Roman Empire. Also, in most of Europe, it was traditional to pay homage to the god of the tribe that defeated you in battle, but this did not mean that you gave up your old gods. Gauls and Vikings often began worshipping Jesus as just another god of many when they were defeated by a Christian army. It was only later that they were "convinced" by Christians to give up their old gods.
That's their fucked up attitide-my god is better than your god.
Every religion wishes it was philosophy because philosophy is a step above religion. Philosophy, although not science, asks a lot of deep unanswered questions about the cosmos and religion wants a part of it to remain relevant. That's my take anyways.
Philosophy in its most basic terms are a set of truths and decisions based on lines of thought. Religion tends to veer toward subservience whereas philosophy is a much more open forum.