apart from religious people sharing the same delusions while schizophrenics create their own?
2007-12-06
06:19:38
·
8 answers
·
asked by
♪
4
in
Health
➔ Mental Health
tatereatinmic: What does radiometric dating have to do with my question? By your cut and paste, are you implying circular reasoning is being used? Please explain to me what you are saying or I will think you're just another loony.
2007-12-06
06:38:28 ·
update #1
*chuckles Erin: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/religionist
2007-12-06
06:40:32 ·
update #2
Thanks AGSF... I think this is the problem. Acceptance of religious zealots is downright dangerous. When the majority appears to have irrational beliefs, regardless of their particular religion, and this shapes a culture, it can be very difficult for rational thinkers. Mad World is not necessarily a good world.
2007-12-06
12:27:15 ·
update #3
A religionist is a person who has excessive, affected, religious zeal.
A schizophrenic is a person who has severe brain damage. It interferes with normal brain and mental functions. It triggers hallunicinations, delusions, paranoia, and a lack of motivation. Without mediation they can not interact appropriately with others.
A religious person would not take meds as being religious is about a choice and one does not medicate a zeal that others have for whatever interests them. Even though a religious person appears to be demented, at times, this could be a personality disorder, coupled with the religious components. It still does not manifests itself into a brain disorder.
Some Muslims and others who use the name of God or their higher power to do the things they do, are simply putting the responsibility of their behavior on another. Similar to a child who blames another sibling, the zealous religionist will do the same, staying a child/immature being in life's actions.
2007-12-06 06:47:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by dutchlady 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
The primary difference is that one (the "religionist") is a majority, accepted by society and who even shapes his society while the other ( schizophrenics), a small minority, are not accepted and seldom influence it.
Good luck with your research into human beliefs and I relations, good mental health, peace and Love!
2007-12-06 17:49:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mad Mac 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
if you think of it from a perspective that religion is a delusion then it is an agreed upon delusion by many people which makes it seem normal. even if something is incorrect if 99 out of 100 thinks it is then they will make it correct.
2007-12-06 18:42:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Radiocarbon dating was developed on the basis of two assumptions (not established facts). In the first place, Libby assumed that the carbon 14 content is consistent in the carbon dioxide which is absorbed by the organism while it is living. In the second place, Libby believed that cosmic rays which produce carbon 14 have remained constant in our atmosphere. Dr. David Hurst Thomas of the American Museum of Natural History addressed the problems of these assumptions when he wrote:
Radiocarbon dating relies on a number of key assumptions, perhaps the most important being that the radiocarbon level — that is, the ratio between carbon 12 and carbon 14 — has remained constant in the earth’s atmosphere. Libby assumed this when developing the method, but we now know that this assumption is not valid. That is, levels of atmospheric carbon 14 have shifted somewhat over the past millennia.17
Shortly after Libby developed his carbon 14 dating method, Egyptologists, who applied his method to well-established historical material, said that “his dates did not square with the historically derived dynastic chronology.”18 Dr. Stuart Piggott, a British archaeologist, excavating near Durington Walls in England, received a radiocarbon date for his site. The radiocarbon test on a piece of charcoal suggested that Piggott’s site was 1000 years older than it actually was. Conclusive data from the site proved that the radiocarbon test was grossly in error. Piggott said of radiocarbon dating that it was “archaeologically unacceptable.”19
2007-12-06 14:25:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by tatereatinmic 3
·
0⤊
4⤋
I think the main difference is that schizophrenia is a diagnosable mental illness, while religionist is a made up word.
2007-12-06 14:28:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Erin 1
·
1⤊
2⤋
I heard this one a long time ago...
"If you talk to God you are spiritual,
If God talks to you...you are schizophrenic."
I have heard of a mental diagnosis of hyper-religiosity. I don't know if it is still called that but it for the people who are totally insane about their religion.
2007-12-06 14:27:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by Ellen 5
·
3⤊
1⤋
Don't ask why I thought this but the religion that would experiences schizophrenic are Islamic.
IT true.
Look up Musson or whatever this shoe bomber muslim guy name is. The lawyer testifies that he have that even those it an excuse to get by the law.
2007-12-06 14:23:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋
religious people have beliefs, schizophrenics have hallucinations etc.
try to be more accepting.
2007-12-06 20:17:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋