I may not know what it is, but it’s not    

CULTURE and not RELIGION!!!

The philosophical method of reasoning and thinking could be interesting, convincing and confusing. It is interesting because of the way philosophers define human reasoning, they behold that humanly believe and credence must be a result of “reasonable” justifications and rationalizations. Conceptually, the sensibility and reasonability of any concept is pertinent to some subjective peculiarity. To them, there are some arbitrary or primitive characteristics of human nature and culture that inform what is reasonable and what is sensible.

It is convincing, as according to postmodernism theorists, they are of the opinion that there is no single approach to any definition, believe or truth. Human beings believe anything that appeal or harmonize to their historic, cultural, social and religious standpoints and sometimes anything that conform to their demographic features. For instance, it might be so difficult to justify washing the private part after urinating to a Non-Muslim, reasonably because s/he does not have an Islamic background or does not subscribe to the Islamic rationality. So philosophically human being can only believe what is related to their culture.

And it is confusing because philosophers do not have a unanimous way to define culture, but most often, they opine that culture is an identical way of living that historically link or connect a group of people, while religion is categorized as an element of culture and often described as a way of life. Which interpretatively means culture is the mother of everyone’s idiosyncratic and peculiar way of life. Therefore, our religion, society, norms and language are facets or derivatives or our culture which is supposedly said to be the connection between us, just like language can also be. Ostensibly, the connection between culture and religion does not need arguing because of the way they can perfectly intertwine. Sometimes it can be difficult to exemplify by separating some features of culture from religion.

But still, I insist that even with the ostensible and philosophically proved connection between religion and culture, they may not be the correct way of human life or the apt guidance of human behavior. It is unfortunate that I may not have theoretical back up to support why, but because philosophically, everyone’s believe should base on his/her rationality, I can enjoy that notion to question some of the sarcastic stance that may not conform with the justification of culture being an element of religion or culture and religion being the systematic guide to everyone’s behavior (way of life). At least if culture is not an institutionalized concept like religion, religion-the element of culture- is an institutionalized concept with unique and distinctive jurisprudence, teachings and virtues peculiar to the type of the religion (such as; Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, and so on). All universal cultures and religions guide their flowers differently as according to the grounding spiritual ideology of that religion or the historic progression of the culture. But in actuality, human beings have succeeded in contorting the good will of these religion and culture to their own convenience, and that is why religion has now become a dreaded word, and often avoided in peaceful settings. Consistently, the fact that two different people may have the same cultural background, they are supposed to behave identically but it possible they don’t and the fact that A and B are followers of the same religion doesn't mean they behave the same way. I strongly believe every individual singly define his/her way of life that can be different from the postulations of religion and culture. On this, I can’t say philosophers are wrong with their definition of culture and religion, but I believe they should be a refurbishment to their definition. Especially if considering the conceptual flaws that the definition of religion being human way of life has caused to this present world. Because the real interpretation of the aforesaid definition is that genocide is a real teachings of Christianity, or there is a chapter in the Islamic holy book that actually condole insurgence and terrorism, or as if slaughtering of humans is the true Buddhism. And if this philosophical view is not refurbish, it will only continue to give room for stereotyping of other peoples’ cultures and religions, racism will continue to grow viral, discrimination and ethnocentrism will eternally prevail and religious bigotry will forever govern the world’s commentary on some people selfish cruelty and violence. Convincingly, as according to the postmodernism way of thinking, what I personally believe is that most human culture and religion often denounce harming, forbid killing of innocents, refute cheating, condemn stealing and so on, and not always guide anyone to the devilish and satanic behaviors that are universally rampant among people of distinct cultures and religion nowadays. - Raji Ridwan Adetunji (2013).