English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It fits the criteria for delusion - a belief in something we can't perceive with our sense, can't experience in any objective way and with no supporting evidence or argument. If I thought there was a pink yeti in my attic you'd think I was crazy, especially if I went on to say it was directing my actions.

Why do we have respect for this? We'd cleary think someone was nuts if it was anything other than religion. I'm sorry if that's a bit harsh, I used to have more respect/moderation when it comes to criticising religion, but I'd like an answer to this question. It's making me increasingly angry that our politicians are vocally deferring to an invisible man in the sky, getting directions from said invisible man, and shaping domestic and foreign policy around this totally unsubstantiated belief.

2006-08-22 05:42:44 · 63 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

I should add I would in theory have no problem with the 'live and let live' thing, or with leaving people to their personal beliefs. But that isn't the reality, pick any theistic religion and we're fighting wars all over the world in the name of these 'personal beliefs'.

2006-08-22 05:54:28 · update #1

Again, this is not about personal belief or leaving other people to do their thing. I'd have no problem leaving other people to believe in god, or pink yetis, or whatever they want, if it wasn't impacting the rest of us. There are wars being fought all around the world, right this second, in the name of religious dogma. Stem cell research, which offers tremendous medical promise, is being stifled on religious grounds. In sub-Saharan Africa millions are dying every year of AIDS and we have Catholic priests preaching the evils of condom use, oftentimes where they're the only source of information and education. These are the real world implications of allowing this dogma to persist, and it's criminal.

2006-08-22 07:49:01 · update #2

To all those who say I offer no evidence that god doesn't exist, or that it's a logical contradition to deny the existence of something I can't disprove (not that I am anyway, as an agnostic).

I have no more obligation to disprove god than I have to disprove leprechauns or santa claus. You need evidence to support the idea that something DOES exist - not the other way around. Maybe there's a planet out there made entirely of marshmallows, but we'd think someone was nuts to believe so without evidence even if we can't prove them wrong.

2006-08-23 19:07:15 · update #3

And obviously I know a belief in god isn't classifiable as a mental illness, or even a delusion, on the basis that a great many people share it. My question was concerning whether there is a reason OTHER than popularity to distinguish it from the kind of delusional or magical thinking that gets diagnosed.

2006-08-23 19:12:36 · update #4

63 answers

Because then the hopeless would have nothing to look forward too. Like yourself, I too suspect that god is as likely as a pink yeti in your attic - but we can't simply quell people's belief in this improbable deity.

What's more absurd is the contradictions inherent in the basis of belief and practise. Think of roman Catholicism and the requirement that one must 'have faith' or 'believe' if one wishes to advance to paradise. Silly isn't it? If their lord is omniscient as they suspect, and as Jesus indicated when he claimed and said "I am the truth.", then should our actions as moral and good humans not be a strong enough basis for judgement alone and without a required adherence to once specific religious doctrine?

2006-08-22 05:55:41 · answer #1 · answered by TONY D 1 · 2 1

Very good point. I think mainly because it involves to much money. I really don't care but they should not have all the tax breaks they have. Also, contributions to them should not be deductable. Who decides what is a religion or a cult. There has always been religion of some sort and always will, the main reason is that it makes our mortality easier to accept. Also, and this is very major, it works with the government in controlling the masses. Throughout history the church has always had a very strong influance on nations. Not just the RC church either. Today in the USA the religious right is a major supporter of Bush et al. We, here in the west are controled just as much as any Muslim. Here in Canada, as a child, I was told that if a solder died in battle he went straight to heaven,(no virgins though). Some time ago I decided to work at being an athiest/Bhuddist. At least Bhuddism gets you to work on improving yourself and leave others alone. as a joke, have you considered changing from 777 to 666. Live well & prosper
When I hear some so called preacher say"God spoke to me & told me such& such" it makes my skin crawl thinking that so many people are buying into it.
Also what do people mean when they say they are saved? When I was a kid in the RC faith, that was the sin of "Presumption". We were taught that you had to keep working at it. Since Islam has more adherants than any other faith, who has the right to say they are wrong. Allah, Yahwah, Jehovah,or Great spirit--They are all the same God.----Praise the Lord, in case I'm wrong----

2006-08-22 06:19:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

It's a good question! I think the illness would ONLY be diagnosed if it wasn't such a huge epidemic. The problem is that such a HUGE percentage of the population believes in space ghosts. If it was perceived as an illness or a disorder, then the whole world would be insane!

The origin of the invisible puppet master came about to help people avoid going crazy......"What's going to happen when we die?" Um, don't worry, you'll live eternally on a cloud and there's this guy named god that's going to be there with you! All will be forgiven, and all answers will be clear to you!

Um, ok.

2006-08-22 05:53:57 · answer #3 · answered by tonevault 3 · 3 0

If I actually hear God saying coherant language to me, an MRI could show that I had a cause for mental illness. If it didn't show anything, a psychologist who didn't believe in God might deduce that I was retreating into a delusional state in order to shield myself from psycic pain of some magnitude. In either case, medication would help to alleviate the symptoms and allow me to function without hearing a voice speaking to me.

If you're a skeptic of the highest order, as you seem to be, you might argue that the same theories apply to someone who doesn't hear a voice directly, and in all major areas of life, seems healthy and functional. That someone still believes in something, though there's no direct contact as such.

So, if you really think it's mental illness, what is the answer? Obviously, to give someone who believes in God a drug to resolve the issue. Problem is, there is no such drug. Does that mean that someone who believes in God necessarily isn't ill? From the perspective of the skeptic, that isn't necessarily true. But let me ask you this... why are so many atheists then dedicated to the idea of argument and debate to make cultural changes? Wouldn't a drug be the way to go, then?

The answer is, of course, that a fully rational person can allow the natural (you would say biological) need for faith in something larger than themselves to involve something supernatural.

2006-08-22 06:01:06 · answer #4 · answered by spacejohn77 3 · 2 3

I like the way you think. I am so sick and tired of people looking at me like I am crazy because I don't have any religious beliefs. They feel sorry for me. I have my beliefs and I feel sorry for them because they believe in heresay and some big guy in the sky. Do they even see the bigger picture here? I am a scientist at heart. There are more answers out there in the universe than any book on this blue polluted planet.
I wish I had an answer for your question. My guess would be because when things go wrong you have to have someone to blame it on.

2006-08-22 05:57:08 · answer #5 · answered by Jill P 3 · 2 1

Don as usual with his cogent, well thought out and heavily referenced response. I'm convinced Don.

I think eventually there will be a DSM category for religious belief (that is the book that categorizes mental illness and dysfunction for psychiatrists) Politically...since theres a near theocracy in the USA right now it won't happen, the delusional have too much political power.

2006-08-22 05:52:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

For the same reason that we don't classify belief that the space shuttle escapes the Earth's gravitational field as mental illness. It's a false belief, but one that is shared by members of society in general. That means that it's perfectly reasonable that a person would hold that false belief, and that the false belief does not reflect mental illness at all.

I don't think that it's very helpful to suggest this, because when the believers can demonstrate that they function perfectly well in day-to-day life, they turn that around as though it is evidence that they are not only mentally healthy, but also _correct_ in their religious beliefs. If we are to have any hope of moving beyond religious beliefs, we're going to have to openly admit both that religious belief is not mental illness, and that religious beliefs are false.

2006-08-22 05:49:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

As in ancient times, our world worships many false gods. But our Bible teaches of the one true God, the only God whose knowledge and words are true.

How can we know that we worship the true God? Is it because we feel right or have certain opinions? Certainly not, for we are flawed in our ability to know what is true or false. The final court of arbitration is God Himself. He has told us that He exists and that He is truth (Jeremiah 10:10; John 17:3; Romans 9:20).

"How do you define right and wrong?"

This question may never have been more important than in these times of eroding morals and constantly changing values. We as a society have moved away from absolutes. "Moral relativism" is the rule of the day.

To know the difference between right and wrong, a person must have a base to start with.

This is where God comes in. He has set clear standards for right and wrong, based upon His own perfect nature. We have already learned that these standards are worth heeding because God is all-knowing, all-powerful and ever-present. Now lets look a bit deeper into His character.

2006-08-22 06:09:51 · answer #8 · answered by g-man 3 · 1 2

Believing Ronny Hubard can get you to a higher mental level is a mental illness. That's why Tom thinks mental health is fake (or glib) because he's in the closet, and his new kid is the second coming, that is one pregnancy that never knew the touch of a man.
Besides, thinking a sci-fi author knows about spirtial groth is just plain glib.

2006-08-22 05:58:20 · answer #9 · answered by J23 3 · 1 1

Tolerance my friend, tolerance - do you know that homosexuality used to be considered criminally insane? But we, even Christians, don't pass out, felt that was a little extreme. And for those of us who have mental illnesses already, we're just grateful we have God to believe in lest our mental illnesses would have already caused us to end our lives. So, you may think its nuts and that's fine with me, and at one time our "politicians" wouldn't have considered starting a day without first acknowledging God and his soveriegnty and its impact on our world and its events, so that doesn't bother me either. And if you've ever tried to go to a mental health facility and discuss your beliefs in God, they do give you a diagnosis for it - probable psychotic tendencies - it's on my medical record - with a dash - believes in God beside it. So, now that you've been given the most accurate description to support your answers - what has changed? You vote, being angry is your choice, and like it or not, your soul would be glad to know the Lord and have a relationship with him.

2006-08-22 05:55:31 · answer #10 · answered by dph_40 6 · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers