Is religion a mental disorder?

reply to post by UndercoverJoe


Now you are becoming ridiculous.
Refute the OP or move on...this silly back and forth is over.

-Peace-

reply to post by Eryiedes

Thank you for your effort in finding what you consider to be evidence that modern Christians believe that murdering people is justified to free their soul.

I don't believe the quote you've provided quite does the job. Allow me to explain my difficulties with it.

One Christian apologist offered the opinion that, since the Canaanite children were doomed to a life with a tribe of desperately wicked people who would perhaps sacrifice them to Malech by burning, some good could be seen as coming from what the Ancient Israelites did.

I note that there is no evidence that this is the view of modern day Christians in general, although it may have been the opinion of ancient Jews.

So, why not look at the same man's opinion on the subject in question, current Christians? Here is what he wrote:

We have no right to play God; it is He and He alone who has the prerogative to give and take life. Yes, the death of a child brings great good to that child. That’s why we are comforted at funerals of children. But there’s nothing in my moral theory that implies that we should bring about this great good (I’m not a utilitarian!). In fact, my moral theory entails that we have a moral duty not to take the life of a child or of any innocent person. God has forbidden us doing so, and anyone who presumes to do so commits a great evil. This is right in line with the teaching of the New Testament, as well as the Old.

www.reasonablefaith.org...

So, William Craig, denies the very position you claim he supports.

Are you shocked that he writes death brings great good to a child? You shouldn't be, it's true. The death of a child, by itself, is a terrible thing which Christians can have no part in. But the result of the death of a perfectly innocent child is a good thing, an eternity with God. But I must emphasize that a Christian has no right or permission to murder a child or anyone else.

Eryiedes, I've got an idea. You have a great determination and drive. Some people have said I have a talent or two of my own. What do you say we work together on a less flammable topic? We could probably produce something fairly good. Let me know.

reply to post by blupblup


The burden of proof is on you to prove demons don't exist.

reply to post by RevelationGeneration


Once more religion has it completely backwards.
First of all, the burden of proof is NEVER on the individual who claims something is not true.
The burden of proof always falls upon the individual who claims something to be true so stop lying.
So if you claim demons are real?
Well then you have to prove it or you're a fool.
Second of all...DO-IT-SOMEWHERE-ELSE!!!
If you are here, then you refute the facts of this OP and nothing else or you move on.
No derailment.
No pointless distractions.
No temper tantrums.
If you can contribute to the conversation fine.
Act like an asshat and you can find yourself a different thread to troll.
Understand?

-Peace-

reply to post by SisyphusRide

maybe Wildtimes can explain why the founder of American Atheist, (Madalyn Murray O'Hair) why her son became a Baptist Minister and Preacher?

I mean raised in a house without God or supposed scare tactics, I have a hard time pseudoscientifically putting my finger on that one.

Just reviewing where I left off, and I have a counter-challenge for you. Can you explain why the son of Evangelical Christian Zionist mega-church mega-rich preacher John Hagee decided to KILL HIMSELF IN HIS BEDROOM right after spending the evening talking to his parents calmly as usual?

Works both ways.

reply to post by beatbox


The problem with classifying religion as a mental health issue (as was done under the communists whom educated that is was madness) is that without religion your culture, human cooperation, nation states and society itself would never have come into being, a famous quote was "Where there is an alter you will find civilisation", Now consider the implication of this, No religion no society just jungle and cave dwelling self obsessed (as atheism is promoting regardless of the humanist argument as most humanists are merely disgruntled ex religious people) primates, were are there schools, there citys, there cultures, indeed we are not a hive mind though large groups do demonstrate heard psychology as shown in the riot and the crowd group mentality that seems to take over but these are short term states of mind while the religious state is a long term one that has demonstrated its significant evolutionary advantage in making the extended group whom share this religon stronger than they whom do not.
There is another thread that states one of the major religions will dissapear in two generations which is not going to happen but if it did then that group would fragment and the stronger religous group left behind would merely step into the power vaccuum thus created.
So no it is not a Mental PROBLEM it is a useful survivale and cultural tool that has and still does serve well for those whom are part of the extended social group and also it is the father and mother of philosophy and science (even when they clash).

Now the counter argument is that we are tribal but tribes without a unifying bond or religion soon break apart at smaller groupings and serve the interests of smaller groupings which we still find even today in the cliques that form in workplaces and school grounds.
These smaller groupings are suitable for smaller social forms of cooperation but tend to antagonistic to other groups and are more primitive and animalistic in there social interaction as opposed to the structured rigors of a religious society.

reply to post by SisyphusRide

I posted some links to an interesting question I wouldn't mind seeing you try to tackle... if you can tackle all the variables of the human being in question not being your own subject.

it can easily be deduced that William J. Murray was exposed to extremism, a radical transformation from not only what is natural in the human development, but from the reality of the social norms which surrounded him.

After some time and with independence he searched for the truth and found it.

Well, first of all, yes, I can tackle it. Happy to. It's called a "case study." EVERYONE is a "case study"...whether they like the 'label' or not, whether they KNOW they are the 'subject' or not. Perhaps you are unaware that I actually have training and the credentials to "tackle" the variables. I will look through the material on Murray.

But from just your quick treatment of it, I would insist that he has "mother issues" that run far deeper than the 'religious' acting out of their little drama.

It works both ways.

Also, I was thinking about this while waking up this morning...

ALL YOUNGSTERS/ADOLESCENTS who are healthy and developing normally must challenge the worldview and beliefs of their parents. It's an emotional requisite for maturity.

Any young person who does not "rebel" (at LEAST via investigation of other points of view, but preferably by exploration) becomes STUNTED by their upbringing, and is not a 'well-rounded', differentiated SELF. They become extensions of their parents/caregivers...as young children, and if they never examine those beliefs from an outside pov, they do not MATURE.

So, it would make sense that young Mr Murray was somehow thwarted as a child by his mother's militant stance, and seeing as how he probably didn't feel too keen on emigrating to Russia and being taken from his roots, he would find, possibly even instinctively, the one thing that would release his mother's hold on him and make it clear to HER that he did so. What more effective way than to renounce her worldview altogether?

Nate Phelps is another 'case study' --- he abandoned his home and family at midnight on his 18th birthday to GET AWAY from his insane Father, Fred Phelps, of Westboro Baptist Church infamy. He now speaks at conferences against religious abuse and tells his story. I've heard DOZENS of these stories...

it's part of the human condition to question our surroundings, and IF we have ample space, freedom, time, and opportunity to do so without fear, we grow into "our own."

LABTECH767
So no it is not a Mental PROBLEM...

Ahhh...but since you didn't watch Bomb in the Brain either all you have done (like every other religious person to respond to the OP) here is make an ascertion with NO FACTS TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIM.
Refute the medical & psychological facts established by the OP or you concede the arguement.
I know it makes you feel better to say what you said but without FACTS it's just an opinion and they aren't worth squat.
What is it with religious people that they just say stuff without ever looking at the evidence and pretend they actually know the facts being discussed. How is that not insane to pretend to have knowledge of things they've never seen or watched at all?
All they do is make ascertions.
When they say "I believe in god" what they are really saying is: "I have no clue".
No offence Lab...but you just said the EXACT same thing.
Come back after you have seen the material and then we can talk.
You can't debate what you don't know, so don't pretend you can.

-Peace-

reply to post by LABTECH767


Comparing atheists to communists - Check (though fallacious)

Suggesting religion is the only reason we dont dwell in caves - Check (also fallacious)

Pointing out how important religion is to the development of civilisations - Check (this I agree with up to a point, though its had its day)

You missed out the comparison of enslavement and forced labour though, they were also very important in the creation of many long lasting and successful civilisations throughout history too. So if religion is necessary for the progression of mankind based on your logic then we must begin the flagrant enslavement of humans again in order to carry on too.

Is that a good thing or a bad thing ?

I mean, why change things if its worked for millenia y'know ?

Who needs progress eh ?

Folks, really. Enough with the attacks on other members.

The answer to the question of the OP - "is religion a mental disorder?" - is:
SOMETIMES.

ANYTHING taken to an extreme is a mental disorder. Religion serves a multitude of purposes for people.
Some find it comforting, others find it remedial, some feel battered by it, and some feel 'saved' (from what? Themselves? Hell?) by it.

It is the degree to which the behavior consumes the person's life, as FlyersFan has said over and over again:

IT CAN interfere with a person's ability to function in the world.

Does it always? No. But when it DOES, it is a mental disorder.

reply to post by Eryiedes


Right well I just watched the first, video the second was about a man we all know had some kind of mental breakdown, I must point out that the interpretation of CULT also applies to most political movements, it is just how you interpret the matter, have you ever been in court as a whitness or been cross examined as the job of any prosecutor or defence is to make an argument and break and argument.

On the eastern front the most common injury among German soldiers was frozen trigger finger, it has been argued this was due to a psychological block causing the soldiers to subconsciously stop blood flow to there trigger finger as they were essentially shooting other human beings whom looked not too disimilar to themselves.

You can apply these arguments about mental state to almost anything and science is a point in question, do you believe in invisible atoms that there are tiny pieces so small that they make up all the matter around you (actually I do but not pieces energy fields).

You detected that I am religous and in that you are correct but how are you not equally mad as the same arguments can be turned around, for me a insane state of affairs is when you find a religion or insitution that is harming the society around it and I do not see that as the case for moderate christians though fundementalists they only have good intentions in spite of there inflexability but are potentially more dangerouse in relation to progress but still they are hanging onto there culture and how is that different to confusionists.

I will not argue any further as I have more pressing problems of my own but this argument has gone on for so very long and will continue to though it is a modern phenomenon that it is in vogue to be seen as atheist and to critisize religion, I dread the future as we in britain have a very atheist tory party whom go to church just for the votes (like the american senate) and like roman senators offer there devotion with one symbolic gesture while stripping the works of christians before them away with the other.

If this was simply an argument between good and bad then fine but it is more an argument about culture and social change and if you will forgive me for quoting a passage, a house divided can not stand.

Remember when you pull the walls down to stand outside the house or the roof will fall on your heads.

And from my perspective GOD is a scientist.

reply to post by wildtimes


They will never admit that.
Not only would it mean they are crazy but it subsumes the notion that god doesn't exist and as we both know, you can reason a religious person out of their position because it wasn't inflicted upon them with reason and evidence in the first place.
They will keep ignoring the verified data on this and do nothing more than obfuscate the issue as they are incapable of discrediting the facts.
If even ONE of them could...we'd have seen it already by now.

-Peace-

(And I disagree...Ideology IS a mental disorder since it is the very essence of brain damage)

reply to post by LABTECH767


And from MY perspective you are unable to refute the medical and psychological data on this subject.
Your post was verbose but said nothing at all about the facts of the OP.
Sounds like you did what every other religious person did when confronted with this material.
Your faith was so fragile, you turned it off.
You can't refute that which you have no knowledge of.
Please try again.

-Peace-

DP

reply to post by Eryiedes

(And I disagree...Ideology IS a mental disorder since it is the very essence of brain damage)

No, Eryiedes, not necessarily.

The "brain damage" is from extreme circumstances such as an absent or abusive parent. Simply "having an ideology" is not evidence of 'brain damage'. I think you might be taking the videos a little further than the producer would have intended.

He is talking about medical, physiological results of EXTREME stress, and he didn't JUST mean religion.

ANY chronic circumstance that causes the brain to go into "emergency mode" for a little kid, that immerses the child in extreme stress all of the time, is equivalent to "brain damage". It is not EXCLUSIVE to religious upbringing, and the videos made that clear....but extreme religious zeal CAN create "brain damage" by diverting the growing brain from a proactive, calm, reasoned response to the world to simply "survival".

While the videos are very valid, he was not ONLY talking about religious browbeating, but ANY Adverse Child Experience.

wildtimes
While the videos are very valid, he was not ONLY talking about religious browbeating, but ANY Adverse Child Experience.

Which is why I said Ideology since it can be religious, political or social.
Since they ALL rewire the brain and almost exclusively for the worse so I say brain damage since it alters a humans thinking from it's normal state to something abnormal.

-Peace-

reply to post by Eryiedes

They will never admit that.

Perhaps not, but each person has their reasons for "not admitting" things about themselves.

Like the guy said: THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS TO KNOW ONESELF. I can't "know" any other adult FOR them...they must look inward, to their OWN beliefs, and identify why they bought in to those beliefs. Only then can one find a balance of what has influenced them and the outcomes of those influences.

I totally believe that EVERY SINGLE PERSON can use therapy, and probably should. Self-knowledge is the key. People who are not confident about how they became the way they are can't truly "know themselves". It's hard work, often painful, and takes a long, long time. In the end, its up to every person to decide what is "best" for themselves, and only THEY are the "experts on themselves." Therapy (GOOD therapy) allows the person to look at themselves from a less subjective perspective. It's very liberating.

All we can do is plant the seeds and water them from time to time. Whether it grows or not depends on the fertility of the soil and the health of the environment.


For whatever it's worth, I'll keep planting seeds. One never knows when they might "take." Someday a load of fertile soil might show up and allow it to sprout, long after I've left the area. Science has proven that.

But if only receives gasoline followed by flames, it never allowed light or nutrients to reach it, it will die. Brain damage.

Religion isn't a mental disorder. It's actually an order because it's been forced into that order.

reply to post by Eryiedes

Since they ALL rewire the brain and almost exclusively for the worse so I say brain damage since it alters a humans thinking from it's normal state to something abnormal.

Again, you've taken the ball and run clear out of the stadium with it.

"Almost exclusively for the worse" is your opinion, and not objective at all.

You are equating "brain-training" with "brain-damage", and yes, sometimes the 'training' recieved causes ABNORMAL brain function. But not always. ALL brains are trained; by their environments. Whether that 'training' results in "damage" is NOT dependent on an "ideology". It is dependent on the SYSTEM OF DELIVERY.

I have an ideology: a secular, non-religious, ideology of social justice and the inherent dignity of the human being. That is not "brain damage" or maladaptive behavior/functioning.