ABSTRACT
RELIGION, said Schopenhauer, is the philosophy of the people. On the other hand, as La Vallèe Poussin remarks, “on ne doit confondre le dogme ou la religion avec le ‘système ‘ ou la philosophie.” 1 In one respect there is certainly a great difference. Philosophy aims to be “ the complete interpretation of experience ”. Religion is not interested in completeness. It is interested in a few facts of experience to which it attributes an absolute truth and value. Its interpretations of these are called dogmas. Whether they can be interpreted in harmony with all the rest of experience is secondary. At first it is not even recognized that there may be contradictions. If the disciple is ever brought to see an apparent contradiction, he may say that what he holds is fundamental, whatever else is true. In that case he remains purely at the standpoint of religion. Or he may proceed to show that the contradictions are not real. He then assumes the standpoint of philosophy, and the final result of his thought is a natural theology or a philosophy of religion. It is still not quite what the philosophers call philosophy, for it retains those fundamentals which religion started with, but which philosophy could never have found out for itself.
