Are Religious Beliefs Delusional?

[Diogenes]

In clinical practice, no clear guidelines exist to distinguish between "normal" religious beliefs and "pathological" religious delusions. Historically, psychiatrists such as Freud have suggested that all religious beliefs are delusional, while the current DSM-IV definition of delusion exempts religious doctrine from pathology altogether. ....
Religious beliefs and delusions alike can arise from neurologic lesions and anomalous experiences, suggesting that at least some religious beliefs can be pathological. Religious beliefs exist outside of the scientific domain; therefore they can be easily labeled delusional from a rational perspective.....

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15990520/
The question for debate is stated in the title, Are Religious Beliefs Delusional?
A subordinate question: Should we distinguish between a learned belief in supernatural phenomena and those who believe and attribute their beliefs to personal experience... and how could we tell?

[Inquirer]

There is historic evidence

Are all written stories automatically true?

No.

I already told you. Perhaps Clownboat can present evidence that the Biblical claims of longevity are the result of a delusion, he did - after all's said and done - make just that claim.

Again, fallacy of shifting the burden of proof.

Yes, perhaps he did but that happens here sometimes.

[Jose Fly]

Are all written stories automatically true?

No.

So on what basis should anyone believe the written stories of 900 year old people?

Yes, perhaps he did but that happens here sometimes.

No, you are repeatedly committing the fallacy.

Also, what delusions are in stories of 900 year old people? What delusions are in common ancestry?

[Inquirer]

Are all written stories automatically true?

No.

So on what basis should anyone believe the written stories of 900 year old people?

That's a matter for each one of us to decide. It took me many years to do reach the point where I was sufficiently open minded and free of bias to begin a thorough examination of all this.

Yes, perhaps he did but that happens here sometimes.

No, you are repeatedly committing the fallacy.

Also, what delusions are in stories of 900 year old people? What delusions are in common ancestry?

There are no delusions in each case (I already said this, you're not paying attention again...)

[JoeyKnothead]

No more delusional than believing mud can eventually give rise to flowers, birds and people all by itself.

A seeing misunderstanding of evolutionary theory combined with thing a magic man used dust to create humans, and I reckon just poofing the rest of into existence.

Projection is a poor way to go about debate.

[Jose Fly]

That's a matter for each one of us to decide. It took me many years to do reach the point where I was sufficiently open minded and free of bias to begin a thorough examination of all this.

Do you believe people lived for 900 years? If so, what besides written stories convinced you?

There are no delusions in each case

Noted.

[William]

No more delusional than believing mud can eventually give rise to flowers, birds and people all by itself.

A seeing misunderstanding of evolutionary theory combined with thing a magic man used dust to create humans, and I reckon just poofing the rest of into existence.

Projection is a poor way to go about debate.

I quite like the simple approach re explanation because scientists can be long-winded in their explanations, using weird words made up...which is natural enough given the complexity, but to my mind, however it is said, it is a mindfully created thing being spoken of and therein, the magic isn't the mindful thing but what the mindful thing is able to make appear to be real and able to be experienced as such.

Ingenious.



[Appearances are often deceptive]

[Inquirer]

That's a matter for each one of us to decide. It took me many years to do reach the point where I was sufficiently open minded and free of bias to begin a thorough examination of all this.

Do you believe people lived for 900 years? If so, what besides written stories convinced you?

It would take to much time and space to explain.

[Jose Fly]

It would take to much time and space to explain.

How about a short list?

For example, for common ancestry I can list several of the lines of supporting evidence without explanations for each. Can you do that for people living 900 years?

[Inquirer]

It would take to much time and space to explain.

How about a short list?

For example, for common ancestry I can list several of the lines of supporting evidence without explanations for each. Can you do that for people living 900 years?

Did you not understand my previous answer?

[Jose Fly]

It would take to much time and space to explain.

How about a short list?

For example, for common ancestry I can list several of the lines of supporting evidence without explanations for each. Can you do that for people living 900 years?

Did you not understand my previous answer?

So I'm going to take it that the only evidence you have for people living 900 years are written stories. And as we agreed, just because something is in a written story, that doesn't mean it's therefore true.

Meanwhile, common descent has multiple, independent lines of evidence from various fields of science as well as direct observation (speciation).

Given the extraordinary nature of people living 900 years, combined with a lack of any physical evidence of such a thing and the fact that it runs contrary to our observations, I contend that it is a rather delusional belief.

Given the multiple, independent lines of evidence from various fields of science as well as direction observation of a key component (speciation), I contend that common ancestry is not delusional at all.

Thus, the claim that people living for 900 years is no more delusional than common ancestry is false.