"philosophy" is _not_ just "comparative religion". it's soooo much broader. i looked at that thread, Evo, and it's not exactly about what i was asking about. my question is more about, how do we discuss what it really means to be an "electrical engineer"? what it really means to do "digital signal processing"? or to do "modular programming"? or "object-oriented programming"? (these are all topics that i have expertise and opinion about, and i haven't even mentioned "physics" or "math", where my expertise is less.) there are philosophies about what all that means and, even in the hard sciences, much of it is subjective, but there is wisdom to be had and gleaned from the discussion. i totally agree that there should be no room for "comparative religion" discussions here, because we all know how that will descend into a "my god/belief_system is great and your god/beliefs are cr@p" sorta mud-flinging fest. we don't want that. in the past, PF has allowed to leak through assertions of belief systems that, IMO, masquarade as a conclusion of science, without intervention from admins. i know because i have piped in on some of them knowing that we were dancing close to the line, but i felt that it was totally unfair that only one side was presented and given the veneer of "science" when it was not science (or not yet science). but, whether you want to call it "philosophy" or not, there is some of that, particularly in the forums of the more recent and speculative physics just as Beyond the Standard Model and Cosmology. and also in the traditional softer sciences like in biology and medical. and it's all because we (as a species) just don't know everything about it, and we need to still try to draw some intermediate knowledge and conclusions so we can proceed with the discipline. i sorta think you closed that discussion prematurely, Evo (i mean the one i just started, not the February one). just my opinion.