What do you do differently in World A versus in World B?
Does it “being a religion” justify you spending time on it every week? Does it “being a religion” mean that you dismiss it outright as stupid and pointless? Does it “being a religion” make you advocate for it to be represented in the Parliament of World Religions? Does it “being a religion” mean that it should get military chaplains?
What is the material, decision-making consequence of this classification choice?
On one level, yes. On another level, it is ironic that your answer has a certain religious feeling—it feels like you are quoting some rationalist sacred text (that any other rationalist could quote just like you did) rather than providing your individual perspective.
(Note that if you say that your individual perspective just happens to be identical to the sacred text, because you consider it better than any spontaneous answer you could generate, that would also be ironic.)
In World A, it “is a religion”.
In World B, it “is not a religion”.
What do you do differently in World A versus in World B?
Does it “being a religion” justify you spending time on it every week? Does it “being a religion” mean that you dismiss it outright as stupid and pointless? Does it “being a religion” make you advocate for it to be represented in the Parliament of World Religions? Does it “being a religion” mean that it should get military chaplains?
What is the material, decision-making consequence of this classification choice?
On one level, yes. On another level, it is ironic that your answer has a certain religious feeling—it feels like you are quoting some rationalist sacred text (that any other rationalist could quote just like you did) rather than providing your individual perspective.
(Note that if you say that your individual perspective just happens to be identical to the sacred text, because you consider it better than any spontaneous answer you could generate, that would also be ironic.)