Does faith fit diagnosis of delusion?

Question

Subjects of both faith and delusion have similar symptoms of believing characters/creatures/things to exist when there is no physical evidence of their existence at all. Right?

Please be scientific in explaining your argument.

Thanks for cool responses!

Actually I understood the clinical definition of delution and the exception of cultural and religious concepts. I knew that some primitive dudes are not called delutional for believing that eating enemies' hearts will give powers [case#1] because it is a usual concept/belief within the culture.

To me such belief is excepted because clinically it does not make sense to declare that majority of the people in the culture have mental problems. But this still does not make them free of a strange mental phenomenon of "believing things that cannot be proven to exist or to be correct".

My point is, if we take away cultural clause and focus only on the observeable beliefs, case#1, religion's supernatural concepts [case#2], imaginary friends [case#3], superstitions [case#4], comet Hale-Bopp came to pick up souls [case#5] all have the same color. Don't you think?

In Logicland cases#1-#5 are called delutional as they are NOT "usual cultural concepts". :-)

Answer 1

Absolutely.

The supernatural – including God, heaven, hell, Satan and tooth fairies – is an invention of the human imagination. The following is for those who believe in the supernatural or indulge other fantasies in preference to reality.

Faith and logic are antithetical. If religious adherents would admit that they believe for PERSONAL, rather than logical, reasons, THEN they would be honest about their "faith". But it’s dishonest to claim one's faith is logical – faith is a personal position, not a logical conclusion.

Faith and doubt always go hand in hand. Faith without doubt is BLIND faith. It takes a closed mind to sublimate doubt to the point of blind faith. Normal people leaven their faith with a little common sense. Doubt always nibbles at the edges of their faith. After all, without doubt, faith would have no context, no purpose, no meaning, no point. Would it?

Because there is no evidence for anything supernatural (including God), NOBODY can claim ANY knowledge of it. Anybody who does is lying or delusional. It takes suspension of disbelief to believe in the supernatural: one must convince oneself that the impossible is possible. This is the opposite of curiosity. You have one life, one quest: yet you choose to surrender it to something you can’t possibly know anything about.

When people talk about faith, they're usually talking about the supernatural: God, angels, miracles, etc. There is, of course, lots of doubt involved because the supernatural is entirely outside the human (natural) realm. It's not so much that God or angels can't exist . . . the real point is that NOBODY has access to the supernatural and thus NOBODY knows ANYTHING about it. Anybody who claims to have faith in something he knows absolutely nothing about is actually confessing to placing his imagination before, and above, his intellect.

Imagination has its place . . . but not where life decisions are involved. Placing imagination above intellect is surrendering your quest for meaning. You are surrendering the meaning of your life to your religion; to your version of God.

And that's fine. Just be honest about it. You made a leap of faith. Your faith is a personal position – not a valid logical conclusion.

Answer 2

its called dates. As well as objective criteria.

Religion has a history. All of them do. (except maybe wicca, and the Church of the flying spaghetti monster.)

They have a predate. Which is my way of saying they existed before we have a lot of records, or exact records, or scientific records (technically speaking there are only about 300 years of scientific records.... maybe 400. the rest is speculation.

Also. If a religion is false then it is invariably made up then of a particualr peoples explanation for existince and is then even more important becuse it reflects more then creation it reflects an identity that could be perserved in no other way.

Also religion has consistency. And faith is based on things you have little to no proof. Delusion is completely delusional. it is product of the inner mind and is rarly in sync. to other cases.


example. religion is cultualy accepted phenominom. Delusion is an individual problem with the brain. Also Delusions are "real" to the person whi is having them. As in they really see, and experince the delusion.

Religion Is faith, which has little or no evidence. So a religious idea is not delusional becuse it reflects an idea about the world and creation. (it is intentionally constructed) A delusion is a bi-product of a mind that is off balance(it is against the whim of the person)

One is intention

delusion is not.

Some religious people are delusional, but religion is not a delusional concept.

Answer 3

No. A delusion is not the belief that something exists when there is no physical evidence. Where did you get that definition anyway?

A delusion is "a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence, especially as a symptom of a psychiatric condition"; or "a false or mistaken belief or idea about something".

Now of course, since you are an extremely scientific fellow, you would not want to accuse anyone of suffering from a delusion without physical proof, would you? In which case, you will find it impossible to prove that an otherwise normal person who has faith in God is suffering from a delusion. The reason being that you would have to prove that God does not exist, and therefore their faith is false. But as any true scientist, or logician, knows, it's impossible to prove a negative.

It was a clever attempt. You tried to ensure your conclusion by skewing the definition of "delusion" in your favor. Unfortunately the facts are against you.

======

Or, let's look at it another way: You define "delusion" as belief in something without physical proof. Besides the fact that you can't prove God's nonexistence, you have the additional problem of providing "physical proof" that the person believes in God in the first place. They may *say* they believe in him, but how is that physical proof? They could be lying. Or, their belief that they believe could be a delusion: Maybe they think they believe but really don't believe at all.

Since you can't provide physical proof of someone's faith, your belief that faithful people are delusional is, by your own definition, a delusion.

Answer 4

"A false personal belief that is not subject to reason or contradictory evidence and is not explained by a person's usual cultural and religious concepts (so that, for example, it is not an article of faith). A delusion may be firmly maintained in the face of incontrovertible evidence that it is false."

If the one line of it is not an article of faith was removed it sure would be a delusion.

Answer 5

"Delusion" label is given to chaotic maladjustment and torment. If you have ever seen it, you would know what I mean.

A person with true "Faith," has Peace, Love, Joy, Forgiveness, Gratitude, Patience. All of the virtues found in a peaceful soul, even in the midst of chaos. If you have ever truely seen it you would know what I mean. Some may find it an illusion, if they themselves don't have that.

Both are products of the mind, but that's where the similarities end.

Answer 6

good question! If there's a line, it incredibly is an extremely skinny one. I trust Waterbender, in that "fable" frequently has the component of an obvious want for proselytizing. faith, by using its nature, could be categorised as a "fable", additionally. yet i don't think that to be real. in line with threat it incredibly is MY fable. if so, I settle for it.

Answer 7

The religious have specifically exempted religiosity from the medical definition of delusion. Otherwise, it's a no-brainer.

Answer 8

Faith is in no way related to delusion. Faith is based on belief in God, in Christ and in the church. Delusion is based solely on mental illness.

Answer 9

You want science? OK.

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=26290

Nope. Doesn't fit the definition. Nice try, though.

Answer 10

Diane M and Samuel Crow's answers.......