Theism, semantics, and mental disorders
Offline Some relevant threads:
Kellym78 on the disorder of theism
Kellym78 on the disorder of theism part deux
RRS in some videos on the mind disorder of theism. Video 1 - Video 2
In the recent storm of debate over whether theism is a mental disorder, I've noticed an interesting word game being played. Those who disapprove of our label are suggesting that theism is not a mental disorder, and that anyone who does something in the name of religion was insane to begin with.
I'd like to remind all of the atheists who object to "Theism is a Mind Disorder" to remember a particular logical fallacy -- No True Scotsman. Let's look at a hypothetical dialog.
1) Theism is a mind disorder.
2) No it isn't.
1) Look at what Joe did. He cut his hand off in the name of religion.
2) He's really crazy. That's not because of theism.
1) Ok, fine. But look at Iran. They've been cutting hands off for centuries in the name of religion.
2) Yeah, but the people who do that are really crazy. That's not because of theism.
1) Ok, fine. But look at America. Despite overwhelming evidence that homosexuality is a normal part of the animal kingdom, including animals, we see groups like the Westboro Baptist Church picketing funerals holding up signs that say, "God Hates Fags."
2) Yeah, but the people who do that are really crazy. That's not because of theism.
1) Ok, fine. There are many states in the U.S. who are actually debating whether or not schools should teach that the earth might be 6000 years old, despite the fact that we know beyond the shadow of any doubt that it is not. We're debating this because of the pressure of huge numbers of theists who believe it, despite overwhelming evidence... not just overwhelming evidence, but... holy cow, man! It's moronic. How could anyone possibly believe this?
2) Yeah, but the people who are pushing for this are just the fringe. They don't represent religion.
1) You changed the subject... are they crazy?
2) Well... um... Want to go to lunch?
At what point do we look at a person's behavior and say they're insane? Did you know that in the 50s, women who didn't want to have children were labeled by the medical community as insane? They were given medication and shock treatment to cure their insanity. The DSM is not a peer reviewed book, contrary to popular belief. If every entry in that book had to be peer reviewed, it would never be published. It's simply an edited version of what most professionals hold to be mental disorders.
Of course, there's a big problem with this. The medical community doesn't agree on the definition of mental disorder, even in America, not to speak of the rest of the world. There's a bigger question here, and it's what RRS is trying to address by attacking theism as a mental disorder.
Theism is not just a haphazard belief. It is a model of reality. Theism literally teaches that logic doesn't work. It says that there are some things that you must believe because they are true despite evidence to the contrary. It says things that are contradictory can both be true. It says that what we perceive as reality is only true if it lines up with doctrines that sometimes contradict reality. If someone believes and firmly holds to a view of reality that is clearly not true, despite ample evidence to the contrary, we say they are mentally disordered. Yet... people who believe theism are not mentally disordered... Only the ones who do really crazy things are.
People who are irrational to the point of breaking with reality are said to be mentally disordered. While the medical community may not agree on the exact classification, the implication is clear. People with PTSD were born with brains that dealt with reality pretty well. As a result of an external trauma, they can no longer function well in society. Even though the syndrome was caused by something external, PTSD is treated as a mental disorder.
So, let's go back to the No True Scotsman fallacy. If we say that anyone who does something crazy -- in the name of religion -- is "just crazy," we have removed the possibility that some people who do things because of the theism are crazy specifically because of the theism. We know that external forces can cause mental instability (PTSD), yet we deny the possibility that theism is just such an external force. We give theism a free pass, yet again, because it's simply too disturbing to imagine that all the theists who do not do things that seem certifiably crazy are simply not mentally disordered enough to do anything really bad.
Let me say that again for clarity. We are discounting the possibility that people who do not do crazy things because of religion are simply resistant to the more insane parts of theism. Everyone who goes into combat does not show symptoms of PTSD. Yet, we know that combat is the catalyst which causes PTSD. We don't go around saying, "People with PTSD were just crazy to begin with!" We admit that the external circumstances -- the combat stress -- caused it. Why do we give theism another free pass simply because every theist doesn't do crazy things?
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
- Login to post comments
Homosexuality used to be listed as a disorder in the DSM as well. To be honest, I'm not bothered much if theism is never listed as a disorder. I just want them to be able to have access to treatment, and have it covered by their insurance provider. We admit people who have imaginary friends in to mental hospitals every day, but if that imaginary friend is Yahweh or Allah, we knee-jerkingly assume via an argumentum ad populum fallacy that this person doesn't deserve treatment. The logic is inconsistent.
It's time for some theists, who have been unusually affected, to be able to seek psychological treatment from doctors who embrace reason over faith, and in some cases to be prescribed atypical antipsychotics.
Aripiprazole (marketed as Abilify)
Clozapine (marketed as Clozaril)
Olanzapine (marketed as Zyprexa)
Olanzapine/Fluoxetine (marketed as Symbyax)
Risperidone (marketed as Risperdal)
Quetiapine (marketed as Seroquel)
Ziprasidone (marketed as Geodon)
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
Clarification before the inevitable bitching:
The RRS does not advocate putting all theists on antipsychotic medication. However, the dude who cut his hand off might have been a lot better off if he'd been on them. We would like particularly bad cases of TDD (Theistic Delusional Disorder) to be treatable.
(Brian, can we please call it TDD? Please? I want to name a disorder!)
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
I just want to say that drugs are unlikely to help a typical theist. It's a memetic disease, not so much a chemical imbalance. The most effective treatment we've used is memetic vaccination, i.e. teaching them reason. It works significantly better than placebo (sitting them in front of a television).
Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!
Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!
I knew the issue of Homosexuality and its listing in the DSM would come up. That was 1973. Should have been 1873, but that has no bearing on whether the "religion is a mental illness" hypothesis is true or not.
First of all, what kind of mental illness are we talking about? Genetically based? Cultish Brainwashing? PTSDs?
And this peculiar mental illness seems to be contagious, making it different than most mental illnesses. Is it a meme? Are there mental illness memes?
What about Quakers, or Unitarians, or Church of Christ people? Are they mentally ill too?
You'd be surprised how many "normal " people are religious. But being irrational is not always enough to demonstrate mental illness.
I mean, all of our ancestors throughout history have been religious, in one form or another. Are we to say that only recent Europeans (specifically, educated Europeans, and typically male) are not mentally ill, but the rest of the world is and has been throughout history, and pre-history?
These superstitious people had irrational beliefs, sure, but mentally ill?
I'm not convinced.
Afraid I'm with Charles on this one. Irrationality doesn't count as a mental illness, otherwise we would all be mentally ill sometimes.
Mental illness is hard to define, so mental health professionals tend to focus first of all on a person's happiness. If you feel good and are successful in life and don't feel like you have a problem, very few psychiatrists are going to diagnose you with a mental illness. And don't throw mania at me because it is always transitory and creates as many problems as it solves. So you can be highly irrational and have a lot of fucked up ideas, but if you are happy and successful, you can be perfectly sane. On the other hand, you may be 100% rational and all your thoughts might add up and balance out, but you just feel like your hands are dirty all the time and it ruins your life. Presto, insanity.
I think we can call religion a lot of things but not a mental disorder since most theists are no less happy or functional than atheists. We probably need a new word that has to do with one's thought being infected by a parasitical meme.
Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown
Due to much of the whining, Kelly is 40 pages of notes in to building a case that theism is a mental disorder. We contacted Dr. Marlene Winell and Dr. Stephen Uhl to attain interest in peer reviewing a short book she might write on the issue instead of making another blog about it.
Dr. Marlene Winell is apparently looking at theism more as a split personality disorder. So it'll take a little convincing but she seemed to agree with Kelly on the idea that theism is just as similar to "Grandiose Delusional Disorder."
Personally I believe theism is already listed in the DSM as "Grandiose Delusional Disorder" however we rarely if ever see doctors willing to admit patients that believe in gods that large portions of the population believe in. However if you have a personal relationship with Ogdorg the God of Zod, they've got no problem finding a anti-psychotic and a mental ward for you.
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
Unless you re-work your definition of mental disorder to be less (purposly..) vaque, I (and by probability, the psychological community..) just won't take it seriouslly.
So re-work your definition of 'mental disorder' or your argument fails.
Completely true. It doesn't, and neither does it's inclusion in the DSM. That was the point of the comparison.
Similar to PTSD. It's a lack of ability to function rationally, brought on by external distress.
Like PTSD, it has varying degrees of severity, and like PTSD, all people who are exposed to the external distress (indoctrination/brainwashing) do not suffer noticable effects.
I think it is memetic in nature. Considering how new the study of memetics is, it's reasonable to suggest that "memetic mental illness" is possible, particularly when we have a great example of it.
All combat soldiers do not suffer PTSD, nor do all assault victims, or people who witness gruesome auto accidents. Likewise, all people who are "religious" do not necessarily show noticable signs of TDD.
Think about the religious people you know. Some only believe in a mystical deist sort of thing, and they function damn rationally. Others literally think they'll get food poisoning if they don't say grace, and they think demons will possess them if they watch a horror movie. Like PTSD, there are an almost limitless number of degrees.
That's a large part of our point. This meme is so widespread that people don't even notice that a great many "normal" people have a serious break with reality.
Have you read my essay on myth, culture and sexuality? It demonstrates just how deeply our socio-religious mythology has inculcated itself into our lives. We don't even realize just how much of our belief about normalcy is not, in fact, normal.
As I've said before, the point of this mental exercise is not to institutionalize everyone on the planet, or to stand on a high horse and laugh at the rest of the world. The point is to demonstrate that theism causes the same kind of break with reality as other things that we label mental disorders.
Again, if someone talks to an invisible friend named Ralph, we call him insane. If his invisible friend happens to be named Jesus, we elect him president. It truly isn't important if theism gets listed in the DSM, and it isn't really all that important if the medical community ever recognizes theism as a kind of PTSD-like syndrome. What is important is that people understand that there is very little difference, if any, between the way theists think and the way people with other mental disorders think. We just sanction theism, and give it a free pass.
To directly answer your question, this is the first time in human history when we've had a scientific alternative to spirits and gods. I don't think it's fair to say that everyone in history was mentally ill. However, since the evidence is in, and theism has been so thoroughly refuted, we can say that people who doggedly hold to a demonstrably false view of reality fit the bill nicely.
They are delusional:
4.Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact: a paranoid delusion.
Chronic delusion that impairs judgment to the point of difficulty functioning is what we call mental illness.
Kelly hasn't been devoting the last week to knitting. Wait for it.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
as I AM giggling ....
We were not born sinners, but we are born retarded and we will die retarded. Accept this and you are only half retarded, but still retarded. Look at our king ! What more proof ya need ?
It is a smart person that knows how truly stupid and small they are, and some will call this faith, and others call it mind disorder, and still others call it wisdom.
Welcome to the human race, of rare common sense.
I am the stupidest idiot I sorta kinda know , lucky me .... the mirror doesn't lie, but we do ......
, on to belly laughs now, maybe to the looney bin soon, love ya always earthlings, you are all me, GOD AS YOU ...... ((( rip a bong hit while ya still can ....
I will die laughing, unless it hurts, so why won't you let me carry morphine ?
Atheism Books.
so what's next? someone says they believe in a god and you pack them off to the mental institution and force them on drugs? boy, you would have fit in well in the soviet union. I agree that with the crazies like Pat Robertson you have a case. But to indiscriminately say anyone who believes in god needs "treatment" is crap. Are you saying we should have put people like MLK jr away, or Al Gore, who you frequently quote? If so, then stop quoting him if he's so crazy. Oh, and delusional disorder also includes delusions of persecution and grandeur-maybe you should look in the mirror on that one (considering how you're always whining about how persecuted you are).
You can easily get rid of a lot of your criticism if you would just admit that not ALL theists are mental (irrational and mental is not the same) and admit there is a difference between them and there are many different kinds, just like there are many different kinds of atheists. It's your blanket labeling and stereotyping that most people react to-the very think you don't want people doing to you.
This is the main problem most people have with you-the fact that you go beyond just protecting atheists and other non believers-you want to actually hurt and marginalize believers. You want reverse discrimination. You want to actually get into people's private lives and tell them what they can and can't believe. Oh sure, they have the "right" do believe it, but you're going to bully and marginalize them until they don't anymore, and if they do you're going to lock them up and medicate them. That's not freedom. It's one thing to contain religion and keep it from influencing government, and to fight back against discrimination, it's another to actually advocate locking up anyone who isn't your kind of atheist.
Why stop at theism? Let's put anyone who uses alternative medicine away too, or anyone who reads horoscopes-why not people who think they are witches too, and psychics? There's Wiccans who believe in faries, and contrary to what Harris says, plenty of people who still believe in Zeus and Thor. Let's lock them all up! Let's lock up 80% of the world! And next let's go for appearser atheists too, why don't we? After all they are irrational too, they dare to challenge you! Let's lock up all the irrational people, so only such rational intellectual people like you are left. Personally, I think your obsession with labeling anyone who isn't like you as mental is starting to sound like a disorder in itself. And as for Kelly, a few classes in Psychology doesn't make one an expert. My sister has 2 degrees in it and plenty of experience and she doesn't consider herself an expert. She says in the field people who take a few classes and think they know everything about it are laughed at and called "newbies". You need to take a long hard look at yourselves before you condemn others.
Well that was friendly now wasn't it? To ask a loaded question based on a disgusting mischaracterization of what none of us have said.
Above I said: I just want them to be able to have access to treatment, and have it covered by their insurance provider. We admit people who have imaginary friends in to mental hospitals every day, but if that imaginary friend is Yahweh or Allah, we knee-jerkingly assume via an argumentum ad populum fallacy that this person doesn't deserve treatment. The logic is inconsistent.
It's time for some theists...to be able to seek psychological treatment from doctors who embrace reason over faith, and in some cases to be prescribed atypical antipsychotics."
And you'd fit well on the little yellow bus.
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
While, Im certaintly seeing that people like Kent Hovind/Fred Phelps etc, are most certaintly delusional, I fail to see how this applies to Theism in general.
It's that they take the Theism to the extreme, and pretty much anything to the extreme can make you delusional, love, video games, hatred, etc.....
While, for example, love in small doses is perfectly sane (hugging your loved one etc..), if it's taking to the extreme ( stalking, thinking a stranger is madly in love with you etc...) is mostly certaintly delusional and worthy of therapy.
That's another problem I find, not all Theists fit into this catagory.
And before you say 'Well, not all people who experience combat gets PTSD!! lulz!!''
Let me put it this way:
All people with PTSD have a set of symptoms (ergo, making it diagnosable etc..), you don't find people with PTSD have that wide range of symptoms, they are all rather similar.
We don't see this in Theism. Their are a wide range of Theist (YEC, moderates, agnostic Deists, etc...........)
'Healing humanity from the mind disorder of theism' , is a compassionate message, but I think the word theism is maybe to broad and open ended. I would use the word religion instead.
Theism — "The belief that gods or deities exist and interact with the universe."
This begs for a definition of god/s. There are many. Whatever ....
The problem is when "whatever" is turned into "religion", as meaning dogma and rules of worship. A huge problem.
Telling the religious they are "sick" is a an important response to their telling the non-believers they are going to hell etc etc. Prejudice and persecution is a sickness.
Being tolerant of the religious is anti-progress and not truly compassionate. "Loving the enemy" is caring and understanding, but not appeasement.
Shouting at the devil ( wrong thinking ), is our moral duty. In the epic mythical story of Jesus, he was killed for doing just that .... Had Jesus been a product of India he would not have been nailed to a cross.
Celebrating a bloody cross?, is that not sick and embarrassing?
Geezz, I hate how ambiguous language and lables are. Whoever wrote the Tower of Babel story was a bit wise ....
Anyway in basic words, it IS progress to say, "Religion is a sickness of the human race that needs curing."
The bibles are proof of not our genius, but mostly of our stupidy, retardedness, ignorance, sickness, or whatever you want to call it.
I cannot think of a more important message than to say, 'the religious are indeed sick.'
God damn it help them !
"Since no one really knows anything about God,
those who think they do are just troublemakers." Rabia Al-Basri
Google 'Your favorite anti-religious quotes' RRS is there ...
Will Moderates Please Get Pissed? Please? http://www.rationalresponders.com/will_moderates_please_get_pissed_please
Atheism Books.
Delusional Disorder:
1) Nonbizarre delusions (i.e., involving situations that occur in real life, such as being followed, poisoned, infected, loved at a distance, or deceived by spouse or lover, or having a disease) of at least 1 month's duration.... check!
2) Apart from the impact of the delusion(s) or its ramifications, functioning is not markedly impaired and behavior is not obviously odd or bizarre.... check!
3) If mood episodes have occurred concurrently with delusions, their total duration has been brief relative to the duration of the delusional periods.... check!
4) The disturbance is not due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, a medication) or a general medical condition.... check!
Subcategory: Grandiose Delusional Disorder - delusions of inflated worth, power, knowledge, identity, or special relationship to a deity or famous person... check!
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Whoops... forgot one...
2.5) Criterion A for Schizophrenia has never been met. Note: Tactile and olfactory hallucinations may be present in Delusional Disorder if they are related to the delusional theme.
Criterion A of Schizophrenia requires two (or more) of the following, each present for a significant portion of time during a 1-month period (or less if successfully treated):
Note: Criteria A of Schizophrenia requires only one symptom if delusions are bizarre or hallucinations consist of a voice keeping up a running commentary on the person's behavior or thoughts, or two or more voices conversing with each other.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Let's see
I thought Theism affects people in all aspects of their lifes.
So let me see.... The mood episodes are short? How does this fit Theism? Last I checked, people keep their moods for the duration of their 'delusion'.
I try so hard not to get mad at you, and it never works.
First, I, for one, have never said that theism affects people in all aspects of their lives. Second, would you please read the sentence again? I'll help you. "Apart from the impact of the delusion(s) or its ramifications..." That means that the delusion has effects and ramifications in some areas of life, which is entirely consistent with theist behavior. "[F]unctioning is not markedly impaired and behavior is not obviously odd or bizarre." This means that apart from their theism, and the parts of their lives that are affected, they seem quite normal. Again, this is entirely consistent with theist behavior.
Have you not been to church before? Many, but not all, theists experience various states of euphoric bliss which they attribute to things like "being slain in the spirit," or "possessed by the Holy Ghost," or "communing with god." The duration of these episodes is usually less than the length of a church service.
Note in the description the word, "IF." This is an indicator that mood episodes are not necessarily part of delusional disorder. This is consistent with the observation that some, but not all, theists experience such mood episodes.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Ditto.
Really? Some Theists tend to prance around saying just how much Jesus loves them. This mood lasts throughout their Theism. There's one example of how the mood generated by the Theism lasts throughout the Theism.
I realize not all Theists feel this way, but the ones that do, it lasts for the full duration of their Theism.
You seem to demand scientific peer reviewed studies about pretty much anything a Theist claims.
Oh, and getting it looked at by Stephen Uhl, and that other one doesn't count as 'peer reviewed'. That's 'peer reviewed' in the same way the Discovery Instiute is 'peer reviewed'. i.e submitted to people who already agree with you.
Admittily it's at least a start, but I want it submitted to a psychological journal.
You didn't bother to read what mood episodes are. In this case, mood episodes are differentiated from those suffered by people with bipolar disorder by duration and causation. It's essentially a brief psychosomatic replication of something that happens chemically in other disorders.
Yep. And you don't. So, which one of us is gullible?
1) I'm not the one writing the paper.
2) I didn't realize you counted as an authority on who counts as authority.
3) It's kind of difficult to get Christians to peer review theism as a mental disorder.
4) It's almost as difficult to get non-Christians to peer review something that will make them incredibly unpopular with 90% of the population.
Um...
hmmm...
In any peer review, if the research is found to be valid, the reviewers agree with the conclusions. Duh. It's not about who reviews it, it's about whether or not the methodology, research, and data stand up to current standards.
So do we.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Yes, I actually do, but even if I didn't, that would have no bearing on whether or not you can produce peer reviewed journals.
1) I never said you were writing the paper. My point is that you are making a claim that is most certaintly easily confirmed/denied based on evidence.
2) I never claimed to be a psychologist. I would think that a psychological journal counts as an authority. If I make a biological claim, the authority is a biological journal. You are making a psychological claim, so it doesn't take a high IQ to realize that a psychological journal is an authority.
3-4) Well submit it anyway and see what they say. They just might present some counter-arguments. You most certaintly seem unafraid to be unpopular of 90% of the population.
Yes, but if they agree before you submit it, there's a problem.
There's a way in this case for both of us to get what we want. Would you like to know what it is?
My issue is that you guys just seem so sure of this, yet aren't in a terrible rush to submit it.
Fuck, I thought I was gonna have to wait until the book was out in order to say "I told you so."
Was I right Hamby or was I right? Two PhDs in psychology are not good enough for Cpt Pineapple he wants us to submit it to section 36 of the APA formerly known as the Catholic league of blah blah. Then and only then will there not be a bias. Oh and for the record Dr. Stephen Uhl is an ex Roman Catholic Priest and I believe his PhD was at a seminary type school. But since he's no longer a Christian, obviously his opinion is worthless. DUH!!!1111
Can't wait to til Kelly wakes up so I can tell her to shove her book up the asses of the fucktards whining about this so she can get back to her current book project that she almost wasted another month on to appease these flip floppy wishy washy intellectual cowards.
And Hamby, I'm too pissed at the nature of the human mindset right now to talk more about this, feel free to expand if you want, you know everywhere I'd go with this.
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
The gameplan was always to write the book after she got her masters in psychology at UPENN. Which would ocurr after her current book project. To think she wasted a week compiling notes and information.... I was right.
Hamby, Kelly: I told you so. :P
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
More PhDs in psychology disagree with you.
Kinky. But unless it's peer reviewed by people who don't already agree with you, I'm not holding my breath.
I know where it's NOT going. To peer reviewed studies. c wat i did thar?
I'm not a psychologist, so I can't really argue with the psychology, heaven knows I tried, so unless you can get this at least accepted into the psychological community, I will put this in the same category as alternate medicine (They have PhDs and books too.....)
I think all this brings up some interesting questions and ideas. Sapient makes a good point in regard to insurance coverage.
There is one thing that seems to be missing. In order for something to be considered a mental disorder it has to be causing significant impairment in school, social, family, or occupational functioning. This is not the case for all theists. In fact for some this has become socially adaptive.
Functioning is also very subjective. The individual may not feel that their functioning is being damaged by their beliefs. This is one of the reasons why homosexuality is not a disorder. That being said individuals who have been damaged from theism and want help may be suffering and not functioning.
"Those who think they know don't know. Those that know they don't know, know."
I agree that those the believe the rapture and those such as Fred Phelps should be able to get treatment covered by their insurance provider.
What I'm arguing against is that Theism as a whole is a mental disorder.
Hey Pineapple, did your mind disorder hinder your ability to realize that those psychology journals you want her to submit it to won't even accept it until she completes a PhD? Hence... the no rush to send it there dipshit.
Oh yeah, you got the disorder alright.
With that said you can pick any psychologist in the world for the dissenting opinion, I already have a very good reasonable expectation of how the theistic psychologist with a mind disorder witll review the book illustrating how said psychologist has a mind disorder.
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
Get Uhl to submit it then. He has a PhD does he not?
So much for simple problem solving skills.
Like I said, you seem so sure about this, yet lack the peer reviewed studies you so demand from Theists.
I personally don't care if Theism turns out to be a 'mental disorder', if I get psychologists to follow you around, I bet they can diagnose you with a variety of them. (OCD seems to immediatly pop into mind...)
Sapient, I have no desire to expand our expound. Remember, I also agreed that Pineapple would go into tangents completely unrelated to the actual content of our idea. Notice that he hasn't refuted me on the simple point -- theists fit all of the criteria for delusional disorder, a disorder already in the DSM.
Even so, what's he bitching about? He doesn't like who we're getting to look at the scientific evidence.
Fuck it.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
I'm not a psychologist, so of course I can't address it. All I can do is ask for scientific peer reviewed data. If you can't provide that, then you are doing the very thing you critize me for.
Scientific evidence is peer reviewed. Presented in journals.
Woah, the mood is becoming quite severe in here.
Anyway, moving past if theism is a mental disorder, and on to why would someone call it a mental disorder.
Is it really a good point? I mean, sure, it'd be nice to get someone treated and have it on the insurance theoretically. After all, the world would be better without religion, and if someone wants to be treated, they should be treated.
But ay, there's the rub. Why would a religious person, who honestly believes, ever want to be treated? Maybe you could force them, I guess. But forcing people to take medication against their will because of their religion... Well, that'd cause a huge backlash from the religious communities, for sure.
Which brings me on to my next point. No matter how loudly you yell "Theism is a mental disorder", and no matter how eloquently you state your case, the majority of people are not going to be convinced (at least until theism is much more mainstream, and maybe not even then, considering how many atheists contend the statement).
And then, if you can't get a consensus, how would you ever get theism into the DSM-IV and get people treated?
Of course, there are other reasons for calling theism a mental disorder, but I'll limit my discussion to this one for the moment.
It's cool, Nen. Pineapple and I go way back. Mostly I just bitch at him for being off topic, and he stays off topic. It gets a little aggravating.
Part of the definition of a mental disorder is that it causes reduced function and sometimes abnormally high levels of stress/distress. If theism does those things, and can be fixed, it's an act of compassion to help get it recognized as a mental disorder.
Should we abandon the quest for accurate description of reality because some people won't like it?
We don't advocate forcing anyone into psychological treatment unless they have been found guilty of a crime and are subject to detention and treatment because of it.
We advocate calling a mental disorder a mental disorder.
40% of Americans believe Jesus is coming back in their lifetimes. The opinion of the majority is often at odds with reality, yet scientists still do science.
Popular consensus has nothing to do with the DSM. There are nearly a billion non-theists in the world. If the normal percentages apply, there are enough psychologists in that bunch to provide an overwhelming amount of corroboration.
Again, (and I'm sure again in another three posts) I will say that the DSM is not our ultimate goal here. We don't know if we can ever get theism into it. However, and this is really important, we can do the work and get the peer review such that we can demonstrate that it should be in the DSM. That, in itself, is a huge step.
Best to provide evidence if you were to ever suggest other reasons, particularly if they involve any of the standard ad-homs against atheists who speak out against irrationality.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
[article]
Investigation of Religious Habits and Mental Health in the Elderly Living in the Community
A cross-sectional study of 6,691 people age 60 and over in Brazil showed that religious practice,particularly evangelic religion, seemed to be associated with mental disorders among elderly people
and highlights the need for further investigation of the underlying effects of religious beliefs on
psychiatric morbidity among elderly people.
Adriana D.S. Baptista, M.D., UNIFESP-EPM, Brazil
New Research Poster 688 – 3:00 p.m. - 5:00 p.m., Rooms B302-B305, Level 3
See? How fucking hard was that? This is exactly what I was looking for, however you dumbasses attacked me for demanding evidence, I found it myself. Now you'll probably use it too support your own fucktard agenda.
You're welcome.
Thank you.
You demanded peer review. Not evidence. You asked for definitions. I gave them to you. You raised objections. I answered them.
Have a nice day.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
I am new here. And a friend sent me a copy of this thread. And I just wanted to know how exactly how you can diagnose theism as a mental disorder?
If you were given a group of people who were a mixture of theists, atheist, and anywhere in between, how would you be able to tell them apart? How could you diagnose them? Could you pick the theists from the atheists?
However on the flip side if you were to put people suffering from PTSD or Delusional Disorder in with a group of people without those disorders, you would some of the time be able to identify the people suffering from that condition. With out even speaking to them, or asking them questions. And as the delusions progressed you be able to identify that condition more easily.
Also the treatment for PTSD or Delusional Disorder does require, usually, some form of medication to help with the delusion. I know of several people who are taking the prescribed medications for delusion disorder, as well ad PTSD and they still believe in God while on the medicine.
I am not sure exactly how religion is a delusion. I haven't met many, or if any at all, religious people, of any faith that have said that they have had one-on-one conversations with there creator. If they claimed that, that would be a delusion.
What about video game addiction which might be added to the DSM-V. Or even internet addiction. Instances have been reported in which users play compulsively, isolating themselves from social contact and focusing almost entirely on in-game achievements rather than life events.
According to the Center for Internet Addiction, "Internet addicts suffer from emotional problems such as depression and anxiety-related disorders and often use the fantasy world of the Internet to psychologically escape unpleasant feelings or stressful situations."
By the definition of a delusional disorder, and the same criteria you used to say that all religious people suffer from delusional disorder. All people who play video games suffer from the same disorder. Most gamers I know have played well over a month. Many have been playing since the birth of Nintendo. Who hasn't seen someone act depressed or moody after losing a life, or failing to obtain some idol in a game. Also when not playing most gamers appear normal, unable to attach that nomenclature by appearance alone. And the ones that you are able to stereotype, are they not the variant to the norm. And I think we can all agree that the majority of gamers do not suffer from a delusional disorder.
Which is similar to the label of all religious people suffer from a delusional disorder. I think not, the varients, not the norm, might suffer from a delusional disorder but not the whole mainstream of the religious society.
Like many disorders, PTSD and theism do not show physical symptoms. Diagnosis requires extended observation. Many of the symptoms of mental disorders require prolonged (chronic) exhibition of symptoms.
So, short answer: In a room with only a few minutes, it would be very difficult to separate atheists and theists without directly answering. With extended observation, it would become much more apparent. (By extended, I mean weeks or months.)
Correct.
This is not universally agreed upon. There are many in the psych community who do not believe medication should be a first line prescription. However, the point is well made. Severe cases of delusional disorder and PTSD seem to be helped significantly by certain antipsychotic medications.
Well, yeah. It might have something to do with the tens of thousands of churches everywhere.
Theism is delusional. Religion is the organized practice of theism.
Scroll up a bit to where I listed the indicators of delusional disorders. Conversations (hallucinations) are more commonly associated with schizophrenic conditions, not delusional disorder.
Addiction is not a disorder. Addictive behavior is sometimes an indicator of an underlying disorder, such as OCD. Develoopmental disorders, as well as social anxiety disorders, can be the underlying cause of antisocial withdrawal which manifests in video game addiction.
Again. Addiction is a symptom, not a disorder.
Horse hockey. Be careful of all or nothing statements, especially when dealing with psychology. Be particularly careful of non-sequiturs like the one you just made. "All people who play video games" is a MUCH wider category than "People who play video games to their own detriment."
Clearly we can. And if we throw out your false analogy from earlier, we see that this whole line of argument is irrelevant.
Remember, disorders involve chronic displays of disfunction. Acute bouts of depression happen to damn near everybody.
As I've demonstrated, there is a distinct difference.
Furthermore, playing video games is not analogous to believing in Jesus. Except for extremely rare exceptions, everyone who plays video games is fully aware that they are engaging in a game about fantasy. Their participation in games has little or nothing to do with their ability to perceive reality accurately or to solve problems. Believing in Jesus, however, creates a delusional perception of reality and inhibits normal function.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Another article that seems to condratict your view
http://content.apa.org/journals/pro/14/2/170.pdf
I can't access it since I don't have a membership.
For me, this is the critical line of demarcation. There's a big difference between theists who claim to have actually talked to or seen God or Jesus and theists who just profess a belief that these entities exist. I'd have no hesitation saying the former have a mental disorder, or have at least experienced a delusionary episode in the past. But I don't think we can necessarily put the latter in that category.
Anyway, look forward to reading Kelly's writings on the matter.
Lazy is a word we use when someone isn't doing what we want them to do.
- Dr. Joy Brown
Would you do that for me? I wouldn't mind meds for OCD, just as long as they don't affect sexual function. For the record I admit I have OCD like symptoms and that something about me is different than many, I joke a case study should be done on me. With that said, my mental disorders are helping to fuel the most dangerous machine you have ever seen fighting the most pervasive mental disorder the Earth has ever known.
I'll take OCD over theism anyday, especially since it doesn't compel me to kill, terrorize, or hate people who don't have OCD, unlike the delusional theists.
Please become a Patron of Brian Sapient
Support our activism efforts by making your Amazon purchases via this link.
I'm glad this sort of discussion is normal.^^
I'm hurt
. But I can understand you. You were expecting reasons such as "You're only saying it because you're angry" and suchlike? Even if I thought such things were true (which I don't - I've no idea whether anger motivates the statement) I wouldn't try using it here. I'd be hacked down in about 3 seconds for it!
The "other reasons" I was referring to are:
And I trust I needn't provide quotations that these are two reasons (amongst others) that RRS call theism a mental disorder? (I can dig them out if necessary.)
Anyhoo, moving on.
I think your points are mostly correct, and bring up some good issues relating to other reasons for calling theism a mental disorder. But really, I don't think they attack the core issue of my first post - is insurance coverage really a good reason for calling theism a mental disorder?
I'm basically saying that I don't think that, until atheism is condoned in the majority, that people will ever seek treatment for their theism. Likely not even then - look how assured in their beliefs cult members are. And so making the treatment available on insurance would seem to be, while idealistically nice, pragmatically useless.
(Being cynical, who would end up paying for the treatment if it did become widespread? Living in a country with universal healthcare, I wouldn't like to see other welfare issues being neglected so people could be cured of their religiosity.)
Fair enough. Yes, that's about what I was expecting. By the way, if you're interested, I think THIS is one of my best essays about atheists and anger.
Both true.
Well, the reason I kind of avoided this question is that I have issues with the way we do medical insurance, particularly with regard to mental disorders and preventative medicine.
I'm intentionally distancing myself from the insurance part of it. Maybe Sapient or Kelly wants to weigh in.
I agree that most people won't.
Reasonable point.
Equally reasonable points. You can probably fill in the blanks in my avoidance of the insurance question.
I personally don't think insurance has anything to do with the question.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Well, aren't you using the same non-sequitur logic by saying all theists have a delusional disorder? Then wouldn't it be better to say that all people who practice theism to their own detriment have a delusional disorder?
Here is a quote from www.psychologytoday.com as part of the definition of delusional disorder. "Duration of any mood symptoms accompanying delusional symptoms has been brief in comparison to duration of delusions. "
Gamers suffer from some of the same symptoms of a delusional disorder. In the defintion of Delusional Disorder it is not stated whether the time frame is consecutively 30 days in a row, it just states lasting longer than a month, and I would consider anyone who has played video games longer than one month a chronic condition.
"Grandiose type (patient believes that he has some great but unrecognized talent or insight, a special identity, knowledge, power, self-worth."
Gamers prefer the alternate reality to thier own, because they feel they have a special identity, power and self worth while playing the game, that they might not feel in the real world, which is a form of delusional disorder.
As I stated above, the delusion is the preferance to live a life, or play a life of fantasy, in which they have special identity, knowledge, power and self-worth that they lack in the real world. I believe there are a number of theories about the effects of video games on there players. The displacement theory,which supports the notion that the time that would normally be spent being active outdoors or in sports, children are now replacing with leisure and inactive time in front of the television, or video games which has caused a rise of childhood obesity.
"Exposure to violent video games has been found to decrease prosocial behaviors. Prosocial behaviors include activities such as giving to charity, volunteering and overall "helping" behaviors(Chambers & Ascione, 1987; Wiegman & Schie, 1998). Other researchers have claimed that exposure to violent video games has predicted alcohol consumption, destruction of school property, and other delinquent behaviors (Anderson & Dill, 2000). Not only have video games have been shown to influence self perception (Funk, Buchman, & Germann, 2000), but they may have a link with body image assessment of the opposite gender. Female video game characters are often hypersexualized and unrealistic (Dietz, 1998; Jansz & Martis, 2003), and have been shown to play a factor in hard-core gamers’ perceptions of ideal beauty (Rask, 2007)." Which are just some of the studies showing the effects of video games.
Perhaps you are right on that point. I only ment to compare the two to show how easily it is to put a label or disorder on something that is most certainly not a disorder.
What is the delusional perception that is created? Also how is normal, I added here, daily, function inhibited by the belief in Jesus?
Sorry about everything in quotes, I am not good at html
For, you Brian, ANYTHING*
You keep doing that.
*Disclaimer: ANYTHING exlcudes actually getting psychologists to follow Brian around. This offer can be termininated by Cpt_pineapple for any reason and with no or little notice.
Potentially, but it appears not. Again, the measure of delusional disorder is chronic disability. It appears that all or virtually all theists (theists being those who actually believe, not those who only go to church for social or political reasons, and do not rely on faith in god in their innermost life and thoughts) have a chronic inability to form accurate thoughts about reality.
I think theism is unique among disorders in that many people are implicitly and explicitly encouraged to act as if they have it. I don't think that everyone in church has a mental disorder. I think everyone who genuinely believes and uses theism as a factor in decision making does.
I believe I've already addressed this. Why do you insist on making the equivocation between some gamers and all theists?
If by, "anyone who has played video games longer than one month" you mean "played for extended periods most or all days for one month," I agree that this constitutes one of the diagnostic criteria for delusional disorder. Please note that the presence of one condition does not conclusively indicate the presence of the disorder.
Furthermore, realize that acute symptoms can last over a month. For instance, someone who disappeared into video games after, say, his mother's funeral, might have acute depression, even though it lasted two or three months.
Furthermore, realize that mood episodes are not an essential part of delusional disorder. They are actually more often associated with other disorders, but sometimes manifest in a less pronounced form in delusional disorder.
Again, virtually all gamers recognize the difference between the game and reality. Preferring the alternate reality might be a symptom of a different problem, but it is not an indication of grandiose type, in which the sufferer believes in an objective reality where they are special.
I'm really not sure why you're hung up on this. It's not a valid comparison.
Yeah, and none of that constitutes delusional disorder.
Yeah. You're talking about any one of a handful of social anxiety disorders, not delusional disorder.
I can say it more times, or you can admit that the comparison isn't valid, or you can provide a correlation between delusional disorder and social anxiety disorder.
I've repeatedly demonstrated that it is not a valid comparison. Your intentions have very little to do with the validity of the argument.
I fixed the quotes for you.
The delusion can have many manifestations:
1) Believing in magic (miracles, whatever)
a) resulting in irrational belief that prayer cures disease, etc.
b) resulting in irrational belief regarding personal responsibility (i.e. I'm not going to worry about it. Jesus will take care of it for me.)
c) resulting in irrational belief regarding cause/effect relationships (i.e. I asked Jesus for a sign, and it started raining. I know he wants me to go to Colorado.)
d) resulting in irrational belief about personal power (I'll pray for you.)
etc... etc...
2) Believing in patently false accounts of reality
a) Young Earth Creationism
b) AIDS is punishment for being gay
c) Homosexuality is abnormal and unnatural
d) Non-Christians are less moral than Christians
e) Morality is fixed and unalterable
f) Sexuality is bad.
g) Men are naturally supposed to be in charge of women
h) man is not an animal, and is supposed to dominate nature
i) global warming can't possibly be real because it disagrees with the biblical version of the end times.
j) African Americans were cursed by god. That's why Africa is in such a bad place now.
k) Same as j, only Middle Easterners, Jews, etc...
l) Theocracy is a good idea
m) Everything works out in the end, because Jesus cares for me.
n) Jesus told me he wanted me to be President of the U.S.
etc... etc... (I have heard theists say every single one of these. Many times. With a straight face.)
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Which theists are you quoting on these? The only point that I am trying to make, but I am by no means a psychologist, and doing a very poor job at it is that putting labels to things can be dangerous and very harmful.
Perhaps I am trying to say, poorly, is your definition of delusional disorder, does not fit well with all, if not most practicing theists. Also you failed to state how the belief in Jesus inhibits daily function.
You stated in number 1 of your list believing in magic (miracles, whatever) does that mean that you do not believe in miracles?
I believe in miracles. Richard Dawkins believes in miracles, most atheists, if I am not mistaken believe in miracles. So are we partially delusioned?
You don't have to tell me you're not a psychologist. Putting labels on things is how science works. The ethical arguments which occur as people debate the implications of labels have nothing to do with the empirical reality behind the labels.
I agree. You are saying it quite poorly. Please, do not just claim that our argument doesn't fit. Demonstrate it. Give me a philosophical position which includes both rationalism and theism. Reconcile the two, and I will recant.
Did you read my list? If you did, and you don't understand the implications, I suggest an introductory psychology book, available at any university bookstore.
Yes. It means I don't believe in miracles.
You are completely mistaken. I have stood not more than three feet away from Richard Dawkins and heard from his own mouth that he rejects miracles.
I'm going to give you a hint: You have not defined the word miracle properly, and it is causing you to make an error of equivocation. If you're not familiar with that, I suggest you read the following series of essays:
http://www.rationalresponders.com/argument_and_debate_forms_and_techniques_part_1
At the bottom of the page, you will find links to parts 2 through 8. In eight sentences, you've convinced me that you're not very familiar with psychology, philosophy, or logic. I'm not trying to be mean, but I'm not going to sugar coat things for you. If you're going to jump into arguments with people who know their shit, you need to know your shit, too.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
And yet in his book he gives credance to miracles in the natural sence. Which is the definition I was using. "To explain a natural phenomena that we yet don't understand."
However you, in your list did not give a definition to miracle either. Which means that a person has a right to take the definition however they like.
It's nice to know what you want. Despite being the founding member of the Waaahmbulance Response Squad--you still don't determine exactly to whom we submit things. K, thx.
Atheist Books
I do believe these 5 are irrational beliefs. But not delusional.
These are all forms of some type of racism, sexism, abuse against minorities, and homosexuality. And have nothing to do with delusional disorders in anyway. There are many people out there with out theism that are guilty of these atrocities. Theist do not hold a monopoly on hate, or irrationality.
I also see no correlation between being irrational and ignorant, which these three show,and delusional disorder.
This is the only statement, in and of its self that I would concede to be delusional.
You are quite right in not sugar coating it. I would not want to sugar coat it to you if I felt right. I am quiet aware that my reasonings were clearly not well explained and I got caught up in trying to explain my thoughts without completely thinking through what I was actually saying. My first remarks on this forum, were my most clear, concise, unfrustrated remarks.
I am sure that you have spent countless of hours of research as well as question and answer sesions with your colleges about the subject, as I have not. I hope to come up with a better more understandable arguement in the future. That matches your time spent on the specific subject.