Should we move Religion under pseudoscience? Poll

Should we move Religion under Pseudoscience?

I say no in that the idea of religion would probably fit best under the umbrella term of philosophy.

The Rev Kros wrote:

I say no in that the idea of religion would probably fit best under the umbrella term of philosophy.

Your post made me think, I may add a philosophy section under culture.

I'd say no. Except for Creationists, few religions pretend to be science. Perhaps a separate Loony Group.

No. I see no point in being insulting to those who believe in any religion.

balrog666 wrote:

No. I see no point in being insulting to those who believe in any religion.

Exactly. There is enough of that on DC. Just leave it where it is.

No. Religion as a sociologcal phenomenon is, or could be, a subject of pretty serious science [sociology, in its non-PC variant]. Some of religion aspects [the teaching of the world, for example] could be swept under the pseudosciences, though. Thus, it all depends - on what aspects one is dealing with. Some of these are dead serious, others not at all. And since the aspects of interest are precisely the serious ones and not the abstruse questions like the number of angels capable of simultaneously dancing on the tip of the needle, or the symbolism of episcopal vestments, to sweep it all into pseudosciences would be erroneous.