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?
Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo. -- H. G. Wells
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)
"I basically subscribed after I checked out that thread that Sapient posted on expenses and the like. Groceries are one of the most important items, so I'm hoping I'm helping there and I'm hoping I help Sapient break even. If I can help stop him from dipping into the retirement fund, I'll be happy." - The Sarge
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!)
Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo. -- H. G. Wells
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).
Q: "Isn't it a miracle that the universe/life/consciousness/myself exists?"
A: "No."
----
For any person P, question Q, and concept X
If the asking of Q depends on the existence of X, and P asks Q
Then X exists, and P should not be surprised of that
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.
"I basically subscribed after I checked out that thread that Sapient posted on expenses and the like. Groceries are one of the most important items, so I'm hoping I'm helping there and I'm hoping I help Sapient break even. If I can help stop him from dipping into the retirement fund, I'll be happy." - The Sarge
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.
You're not thinking, you're merely being logical -Neils Bohr to Einstein
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.
Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo. -- H. G. Wells
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 ?
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.
"I basically subscribed after I checked out that thread that Sapient posted on expenses and the like. Groceries are one of the most important items, so I'm hoping I'm helping there and I'm hoping I help Sapient break even. If I can help stop him from dipping into the retirement fund, I'll be happy." - The Sarge
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.
You're not thinking, you're merely being logical -Neils Bohr to Einstein
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...........)
You're not thinking, you're merely being logical -Neils Bohr to Einstein
'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
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!
Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo. -- H. G. Wells
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.
Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo. -- H. G. Wells
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'.
You're not thinking, you're merely being logical -Neils Bohr to Einstein
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.
Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo. -- H. G. Wells
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're not thinking, you're merely being logical -Neils Bohr to Einstein
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.
Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo. -- H. G. Wells