Spirituality vs Insanity

This is a question that I don't seem to be able to find an answer to. Why is one person considered a spiritual leader or having a spiritual experience while another considered to be going through psychosis?

I will start by confessing that as I've read through threads on this site and others I have come to snap judgements about the commenters mental status. I've read comments and right away thought "Woo you're delusional." At the same time I have read books that were purportedly channelled and given them merit. Why? I don't know if it's because of the writers' popularity or if there is something in it that struck me as being probable.

There are followers of so many who are channelling books, speeches, lifestyles and they take their belief very seriously.Two that come to the top of my head are Esther Hicks and Doreen Virtue. What makes them different to the run of the mill schizophrenic who is being medicated and/or hospitalized for the exact same experiences? If these things are a mental illness for one, should the same thing not be considered a mental illness for all?

I've had experiences in my own lifetime, spiritual, paranormal, an NDE so I can't really sit in judgement. I couldn't tell you for sure if these things were real or just real to me. Even while going through them I was wondering if I was hallucinating. This almost makes me wonder while some people are sure enough, like our celebrity channellers, that what they are going through is real to be making books and giving performances based on these experiences.

Ideas?

originally posted by: meomy
This is a question that I don't seem to be able to find an answer to. Why is one person considered a spiritual leader or having a spiritual experience while another considered to be going through psychosis?


Ideas?

It could be that when a 'spiritual experience' happens one might go to a doctor and end up being treated with drugs to cure the 'problem' and the other might enquire into non duality.

a reply to: meomy

It is the simple fact that the majority of people already agree with the delusion. The amount of confirmation bias that the average american is confronted with all day every day is proportianal to the amount of people who confirm their own biases when they talk about their spiritual experiences.

When a believer reads about a spiritual experience that is well written, and already agrees with their beliefs, it is far more likely to be accepted as a reliable testimony. Even without any research into the validity of the story. Or any understanding of science.


Most people who search out literature of this type are looking for answers or already accept it as a possibility. Therefor they are more likely to accept the accounts as reliable. Confirmation bias in short.

One must study science if one wishes to unlock the secrets of the universe. Period. Especially if you want to give any merit to the idea of "supernatural or spiritual events" as terms to be taken seriously. By definition these terms are referring to the idea that something can exist outside of the physical realm (which actually includes electrons, protons, neutrons, quarks, bosons, and all the space of our universe). When our models and logic shows that only physical objects can interact with other physical objects. Scientists who are well trained in inductive reasoning and know the many fallacious traps and pitfalls that one can be faced with when using logic to sort out the bits, are better at predicting than any prophet or medium, ley person, or non scientifically trained priest or a witch doctor.

If someone wanted to prove that any of this stuff is possible, they would have to use the simple but strict methods of science to do so. If that simple requirement were met, then that phenomenon would fall squarely onto the side of a natural, testable, observable, event.

Nothing of the sort has happened after thousands of years of hard core looking. Thousands of accounts of personal testimonies, but never any testable, verifiable, evidence. That fact alone puts it in the collumn of "very unlikely to ever be shown to exist."

I am well aware that we do not understand everything, but nothing we figure out in the future will contradict what we have seen to exist today. We will only come to a better understanding of the proper ways to understand our relationship with the world.

a reply to: meomy

About your paranormal experience(s) were there other people besides you that witnessed it?

Just wondering because you said…

I couldn't tell you for sure if these things were real or just real to me.

I was with others that saw the same things. It tends to remove doubt about it being "real" or not. Sometimes other things occur in conjunction that only when added up make the experience more credible.

About your main question…

Why is one person considered a spiritual leader or having a spiritual experience while another considered to be going through psychosis?

Because other people that have spiritual or paranormal experiences know what thats like and anyone that pretends to have them is usually easily spotted.

Or somebody latches onto someone else's experience and seeks to discredit them because of a particular agenda.

Things is to find or figure out whats real for you and to use that to discern where others are coming from.

This almost makes me wonder while some people are sure enough, like our celebrity channelers, that what they are going through is real to be making books and giving performances based on these experiences.

Most if not all celebrity "psychics" are doing it for fame or money.

You should study the career of Harry Houdini. He was an extraordinary magician and master of the illusion. He sought out seers or fortune tellers and exposed them everywhere he went. He was the penultimate debunker while still believing in the spirit as well.

The stuff written about Houdini debunking supposed mediums is hilarious and telling.

ETA: search results

a reply to: meomy

So I feel like I shouldn't but I share my opinion:
Insanity is described as doing the same over and over again starting from the same point zero and expecting a different outcome, mostly in a selfdestructive manner. Like for example, I heard atoms consist mostly of empty space, now every day I wake up and try to run through a wall...
Spirituality is two different things. If you mix it with a purpose outside your personal growth, like let's say make a living with it, it isn't very spiritual anymore but material.
True spirituality are the journeys your mind makes to grow. It's not ment to be materialising or manifesting in touchable outcomes.

a reply to: meomy

Perhaps the dividing line between who becomes a spiritual leader and who is just viewed as a nut is simply due to charisma. In fact, one of the definitions of "charismatic" is basically someone who talks to God--the gift of tongues, divinely given powers, or personal experiences. Charisma is right there in the name of that one.

Spirituality actually inhabits the razor's edge between madness and spirituality. Is it schizophrenia or divinity? Who knows but in the end, I really do think it is whether or not the individual oozes charisma or not. Even with a charismatic individual, though, you're bound to find quite a few that are going to still simply think they are insane.

OP From my point of view you kinda nailed it. I think much of the problems that we call hallucinations are not what they seem to be and the approach with pills are probably not fixing the real problem underneath. Maybe a combination of spiritual/drugs would be better than the only drugs approach.

“And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche

a reply to: meomy

Why is one person considered a spiritual leader or having a spiritual experience while another considered to be going through psychosis?

The former is self-diagnosed, while the latter is diagnosed by professionals. In any case of illness, self-diagnosis is rarely beneficial.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

So, the question was exactly that, where does the illness start and what's just a creative mind? You expert you didn't get what the discussion is about, huh?

I think it depends on the definition of those two words, as well as what tribe or heritage one is from.

For example, if I was Viking, spirituality for me would be to crush my enemies, to see them driven before me, and to hear lamentations of their woman.
Insanity to them would be trying to hug the enemy.

Both are crazy, and they wanna be left an right figuratively , but you need both hands to wash each other.

a reply to: Specimen

And you totally nailed it. We should all meditate on your statement now.

a reply to: meomy

A lot of it has to do with what the person reading believes and how open they are.

I mean really how can we say for sure that ghosts/spirits don't exist? There is so much we don't know and so much we can't see (light spectrum vs visible light spectrum). We are too young to know for sure, especially if we are capable of being able to slip into other universes.

a reply to: Peeple

So, the question was exactly that, where does the illness start and what's just a creative mind? You expert you didn't get what the discussion is about, huh?

Are you sure about that?

Some people think they're having a mystical experience when they're really having a stroke.

a reply to: meomy

Superstition and Spirituality has never triumphed over Science and Reason.

So, with that in mind, I would suggest that anyone hearing voices or receiving messages should immediately get themselves check out. This isn't because I think so many people are having mental health issues, it could be brain tumors, weird molds in your house, or a plethora of other scientifically accountable and rational reasons for said phenomena.

If you were having visions, why wouldn't you get checked out to make sure you didn't have something wrong with you? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Do you consider that constructive? Elaborate or at least explain why you are so judgemental.
Near death experiences are the most spiritual ones we can have

a reply to: AgentShillington

Inner monologue and creativity aren't a health issue...

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: AgentShillington

Inner monologue and creativity aren't a health issue...

Are we talking about inner monologue and creativity, or are we talking about channeling spirits, seeing demons, and visiting other planets?

I just want to be clear.

a reply to: AgentShillington

Uhm not sure... Seeing demons etc. = crazy...
Are we talking about that? Meomy? Are we? Where is she/he/it?

a reply to: Peeple

Do you consider that constructive? Elaborate or at least explain why you are so judgemental.
Near death experiences are the most spiritual ones we can have

Are you trying to say I am wrong?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I'm not judging... Might be a question of personality.