On page 155 of Reza Aslan’s “No god but God,” introduces a concept originally created by Spanish philosopher and physician Ibn Rushd dubbed the “two truths” theory. This theory idealizes religion and philosophy as two different ends of a spectrum, with religion being the truth of the masses, and philosophy as truth itself through the scope of human reasoning. I believe there are certain levels validity to this argument as well as discredibility.
As an atheist raised in the Greek Orthodox religion, I have always agreed with Rushd’s view of religion being the truth of the masses. While I personally believe that religion is a fabrication that has persisted through centuries in order to help rationalize what human perception cannot explain, I do also believe there is a sort of truth within the foundation of religions around the world. Many large religious groups such as Islam, Christianity and Catholicism have had such a tremendous impact on the history of the world, through events such as the crusades, colonialism in the new world, etc. It is hard to ignore and rebuke such powerful entities in their own belief systems after having such a profound effect on history. Simply put, I think that religions have created a sort of validity for themselves throughout their impact on history, which is why they are still so incredibly pertinent today.
However, I disagree with Rushd’s view of philosophy and its standing with religion. Primarily, I believe that the two are not opposing factors, but that philosophy is the marriage of past and present knowledge in the ever-evolving pursuit of trying to find “truth” in a world for those who seek meaning in it. What I mean is that to me, religion and science and any other sort of groups of knowledge and thinking are the building blocks for the concept of philosophy.
What are your guys’ personal views on your own religious beliefs and the “two-truths” theory?