The Mental-Illness Theory of Religion

[Jagella]

There are some viable theories of religious belief, and to posit that religious belief is a mental illness is one such theory.

It should be instructive to begin to discuss this theory with an analogy that should clarify that psychological disturbance underlies belief in gods and the supernatural. Let's say that I am sincerely claiming that I am in touch with powerful extraterrestrials. I say I communicate with them telepathically. I can and do ask them to use their highly-advanced technology to help me, and they grant my requests. I testify that their help to me has included their curing my illnesses and altering the weather for me. When skeptics ask about my ET friends, I explain that the skeptics need to please these ETs by accepting their existence. Otherwise, the skeptics will receive nothing from them!

It gets even better. I am certain that one day soon these ETs will arrive on earth from space with a spectacular display of their most advanced technologies. They will alter the light-refraction traits of the atmosphere to darken the sun and make the moon blood-red. They'll even make it appear that the stars are falling to the earth! And if that's not impressive enough, they will incinerate all people who have refused to believe in them with death-ray energy beams. Those of us who have faithfully followed these ETs will be teleported into their spacecraft to be taken away to live in paradise forever on their planet, Mumbo-Jumbo.

I'm crazy as anybody here, both believer and unbeliever, can clearly see. I'm very deluded. Yet, with just a few changes of the words I'm using, you can uncover basic Christian theology.

Why, then, is Christianity and other religions not mental illness?

[Willum]

[Replying to post 130 by bluethread]

This is called, "striking too close to home."
It is good that you are growing closer to it, so that you realize that were this an phenomenon pertinent to individuals, modern non-witch-burning societies, recognize this as mentally unstable people.

The saving grace is that if people are taught these ideas from youth, brainwashing and the power of suggestion, they aren't actually insane, because many do not get violent when their ideas are confounded.

Of course that is its pathology as well.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 130 by bluethread]

This is called, "striking too close to home."
It is good that you are growing closer to it, so that you realize that were this an phenomenon pertinent to individuals, modern non-witch-burning societies, recognize this as mentally unstable people.

The saving grace is that if people are taught these ideas from youth, brainwashing and the power of suggestion, they aren't actually insane, because many do not get violent when their ideas are confounded.

Of course that is its pathology as well.

So, what are your credentials and on what are you basing this diagnosis?

[Willum]

[Replying to post 132 by bluethread]

Well, I guess I'll base it on your responses not being logically consistent with posts.
It does not require a professional to be able to read criteria. I made no diagnosis.

Your specious endeavor to disqualify logic by undermining anothers' credentials just presents the facts more plainly.

What are your credentials that we should see the body of public knowledge and acknowledged medical wisdom, and take exception because of whom you are?

Are you able to dismiss DSM-V criteria on a basis of individual or general exception?

I am certainly capable of reading DSM-V, but I am not capable of presenting a contrary opinion, which you seem to be attempting to do, under the guise of attacking my credentials.

[Jagella]

[Replying to post 128 by bluethread]

If I may, could you inform us as to your psychiatric credentials?

And if I may, have you answered the question for debate in my OP? If you did read the OP and answered that question, then you'd see that any "credentials" other than common sense on my part is irrelevant.

I personally have none.

Yes you do. If you can read and use elementary logical deduction, then you can engage the topic in the OP.

However, it is my understanding that it is malpractice to diagnosis psychiatric disorders in individuals one has not properly examined.

LOL--good try at dodging my question! That might be, but any issues of malpractice are totally irrelevant to the topic of this thread. We are discussing if we can conclude people are delusional based on their beliefs.

Also, if I am not mistaken the best way to treat a delusional individual is to presume the delusion to be true and proceed from there, because to the delusional person the delusion does exist.

Of course. Do you think ETs and/or gods are real based on the beliefs people hold about them? IF ETs are unlikely to be real, then why would the gods be real?

Therefore, if theism and the practices related to theism are psychological delusion, should we not be proceeding from the presumption that theism is correct and determining the effects of those delusions on a case by case basis?

Here's where inductive logic comes into play. If virtually all cases of god-belief turn out to be fantasy, then we can conclude they're all fantasies until we find evidence to the contrary.

I was good enough to answer your questions, so please answer mine.

[bluethread]

I was good enough to answer your questions, so please answer mine.

Well, if those are examples of direct answers, I have answerede your questions directly also. However, let's start again, as you insist.

Why, then, is Christianity and other religions not mental illness?

Quite simply, I do not think that practices based on theistic philosophy in general are mental illness, because they do not generally interfer with people living productive lives and in fact reinforce standards that lead to a stable society.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 135 by bluethread]

Well, commit genocide on others.
Commit inquisition.
Frequent wars.

So, not exactly stable.

It is a kind of mass insanity.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 135 by bluethread]

Well, commit genocide on others.
Commit inquisition.
Frequent wars.

So, not exactly stable.

It is a kind of mass insanity.

Those are not regular practices of theists in general. Also, such things are also done by nontheists.

[Jagella]

[Replying to post 135 by bluethread]

Why, then, is Christianity and other religions not mental illness?

Quite simply, I do not think that practices based on theistic philosophy in general are mental illness, because they do not generally interfer with people living productive lives and in fact reinforce standards that lead to a stable society.

Thanks for the answer. So as long as people live "productive lives" what they think is true no matter how much it differs from reality does not make them mentally ill. Is it correct to say that my ET belief does not make me mentally ill as long as I live a "productive life"?

One possible counter example to your productive-person-is-not-mentally-ill claim is that of Vincent van Gogh. He was a towering artistic genius who produced over 2,000 paintings. Tragically, he committed suicide when he was only 37 years old.

He was mentally ill.

I hope you can understand just how important it is for the mentally ill to get help. I fear that we may disregard mental illness if it is in the form of religiosity, and mental illness often does take that form.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 137 by bluethread]

Ah, maybe, we haven't seen too much of it by non-theists, however, genocides, war, slavery and so on are virtually always empowered by invoking God. The Bible says so, and so do modern leaders.

Still, it is pretty twisted, I guess it qualifies as insane.

If 1 in 100 non-theists do this kind of thing, it is certainly a qualifier.
It says 99 religious people are willing to murder for every 1 non-.

It is very good support for J-'s pet theory.

[marco]

Why, then, is Christianity and other religions not mental illness?

You argue well enough, Jagella. The problem with parallels is they aren't - what is true for the analogy may not be true for the situation under debate. The same criticism applies to Christ's parables; they have limited validity.

As for people being insane, it is a truth generally acknowledged that genius is a close friend of insanity; truth has a funny way of appearing in embarrassing situations.

I agree with your idea that religious scenarios are fabrications. However, there is still the possibility that in the midst of the rubbish and human debris there lies a golden truth, not the one seen by the fantasists. And perhaps, in our eagerness to dismiss and parody, we become blind to that truth.

I haven't seen it, mind you.