Christianity is a mental illness!
80 comments
Redhunter: "What is, 'True', Alex. Give me 'Fundamental-retardation' for $800 please."
Strange, when Dawkins says it's a mental virus, nobody seems to laugh, au contraire, they praise Dawkins. Here, we have someone saying exactly the same thing and he is ridiculed.
Raskolnikov, you're equivocating different meanings of the words "virus" and "illness." A mental illness and a mental virus are not the same thing. A mental virus is just a meme -- as is any idea that spreads and undergoes changes -- and that's all.additional religious education; something along the lines of a conventional world religions class in which the religion of one's family doesn't get a privileged position.
I don't find it to be in jest, and even if it were, I don't find it to be false.
"Strange, when Dawkins says it's a mental virus, nobody seems to laugh, au contraire, they praise Dawkins. Here, we have someone saying exactly the same thing and he is ridiculed.
Well, I've been saying that for a while now.
A bit hyperbolic, but I can't disagree with the sentiment, at least for fundie Xianism. Usual, moderate Xianism would rate as a simple excentricity, as far as I'm concerned.
@Redhunter
What else do you call the denial of reality? Geology, science, space exploration and tons of other things have proven many of the "facts" of the bible wrong, yet some will still cling to the words in a book, despite overwhelming evidence. That's not crazy? I have to disagree with you. While what you describe is crazy and is a religious pathology, this doesn't mean that religion is itself pathological. I think one can go too far in making that kind of generalization. Surely there are Christians you know which you consider sane, rational, virtuous, but simply mistaken.
I think it comes on a little strong, myself. Christianity stems from the age-old belief that we need to belong to something, and that there's more out there than just what we can see. It comforts people. Death is unsettling, but by deciding that there was a Heaven, suddenly things were okay again. And life was harsh, but if there's a big benevolent man with a beard, dictating everything, well, all right, I feel much safer now. Think about it; didn't you guys feel much safer when you were little, your parents ruled your world, and they were infallible?
Although I agree that religious fundamentalists could be classified as mentally ill, Christianity is not an illness. It is a religion, one of many humans have created. To say one religion is an illness is to say that all are.
@Burning Stake
Although I agree that religious fundamentalists could be classified as mentally ill, Christianity is not an illness. It is a religion, one of many humans have created. To say one religion is an illness is to say that all are.
Hertzyscowicz : So, let's say that it's insanity to believe myths in general after being loaded with evidence on the contrary.
I don't think this is fundie, because it was in response to something along the lines of, "Christianity is not a religion." It's just a response that seems to have been made in jest.
There is sometimes a fine line between legitimate criticism of religion and inaccurate or exaggerated insults of it. I'm sure this was expressed in a moment of hyperbole, but I think it nonetheless qualifies as "fundyism" of a sort and deserves to be here -- if only to remind us to observe the boundaries of argument that we expect religious believers to observe.Boy: In case you hadn't noticed, a fair number of people here agree that this sentiment was overdone. And nobody forced FSTDT to post this comment; it was submitted and accepted. So I would hope that you would see that the site at least strives to be fair.
~David D.G.
I'm inclined to think that the human propensity toward religion is simply the byproduct of neurophysiological evolution (probably an admixture of several beneficial psychological traits, such as the ability to think abstractly, anticipate future events based on current actions, pattern recognition, and so forth), but then I also wonder if there really is all that much difference between Accepted Religious Dogma A and my neighbor believing that his garden gnomes are 3-dimensional projections of hyperdimensional superbeings who control the universe.
"Maybe I deserve that label of secular Fundie. I don't really see what would be bad about that. The fundamentals of reality are much more solidly supported than the fundamentals of religious dogmas. Wouldn't a secular Fundie simply be one well-grounded in reality?
@"PapaBear"
I have to agree. Isn't one of the most common symptoms of many mental illnesses to deny reality? Isn't being delusional something of a mental illness?
Most Christians simply add some unprovable assumptions to their (accurate as anyone else's) perceptions of reality. That's not 'denying reality'. There are some, and we call them 'fundies', that deny reality. I'd agree that they are mentally ill.
Not all mental illness is biological in nature. Some forms can come as a result of stress, trauma, etc. So to rule out the possibility of fundyism being an illness simply because they weren't born with it is a bit silly.
Burning Stake -- I am comfortable with classifying all religions as mental illnesses.
Well, I'd say.. expand that to ALL religion.. and I happen to agree. Like Bill Maher said, "Christians and others who are religious suffer from a neurological disorder that "stops people from thinking." and that it "spreads guilt and hatred among people while offering nothing in return."Faith is a mental disorder which symptoms include: the manipulation of fiction into what the patient believes to be fact, a heightened withdrawal from reality and a higher likelihood of delusional thought patterns. In more extreme cases the disorder has the potential for patients to suffer hallucinogenic effects as well as emotional or intellectual disturbances. It is also not uncommon for faith to be present at the root of hate, bigotry, violence and crime. In severe instances this disease can cause individuals to commit inhumane acts such as those committed during the Middle Ages, the enslavement of various ethnicities, the atrocities committed by that of Adolph Hitler, leading up to certain modern terrorist organizations.
Faith shares a more common diagnosis which is known in the psychiatric profession as schizophrenia; however, the item that differentiates the two is that faith is most often a disorder that is instilled through mental trauma at a young age (i.e.: churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, etc.) Schizophrenia is most commonly a genetic abnormality but research indicates that it can indeed stem from outside stimuli, thus bridging the gap between the two disorders. Unfortunately there is no guaranteed cure for the disease; but there is some hope for these individuals and it consists of a daily regimen of free and rational thinking. It is advised that anyone exhibiting any of the early symptoms of the disorder be treated early by an abnormally high dosage of educational material. While the success rates of such treatments still remain unpublished, the preliminary reports indicate rates at around 10-15%. "
Goatboy : Not all mental illness is biological in nature. Some forms can come as a result of stress, trauma, etc.type of insanity.
The Meromorph -- I still maintain that all Christianity is delusional. If one believes someone was killed to atone for everyone else's sins, was 3 days dead, arose alive, then ascended into heaven, one is delusional, yet these are beliefs central to even the most mild forms of Christianity.
Fundamentalist Atheism is pretty funny, too. Religious nuts with farout stories tend to be more amusing, obviously.
@Papabear
How much of Christian dogma can one strip away in an effort to make it non-delusional? Would it still be Christianity or a religion? It's hard for me to defend any interpretations of Christianity because I don't believe any of them. It's hard to do this without actually defending the holding of those beliefs. Maybe I can't. Ah, it's an exercise. I'll try.liberals aren't necessarily crazy and you hit me with a classic, century-old criticism of liberal theology. It's watered down, they say. That's fair, but I don't think it's a substantial criticism. To phrase it in more accurate terms, it would read: "How far from the orthodox understanding can one be and still be a follower of Jesus Christ?" Reworded this way, the hidden assumption that the orthodox is the best representation of what it means to follow Jesus' teachings is made clear. In fact, any definition of Christian necessarily presupposes some particular theology. Some denominations use baptism, others salvation status, some devotion to particular articles of faith, still others a proclamation in order to separate Christian from non-Christian. To judge people as more or less Christian for their theology is to necessarily beg the question.
Theologies themselves can only be objectively judged by correspondence with the historical record. I think you make that case for the liberal Christian. We all do. You would say that genesis is myth borrowed from an older religion, as would they. (Myth may have an invariant truth around which details may change, which reading myth as non-myth will lose sight of.) You would say that the bible isn't innerent, as would they. As the evidence mounts for such things, the case is made that if any Christianity is "a true Christianity" than it would liberal rather than orthodox. Excellent evidence of this are the attempts to reverse-engineer the bible and to uncover extra-biblical clues to reveal a "more pure" picture of Jesus and his teachings. They see the bible as a record of political infighting and retold stories. They want to sweep away all the crap that's found its way in and uncover some truth.
And if Christianity continues to exist but ceases to be a religion, what's the loss? Perhaps I don't understand the issues well enough to see the problem.
@PapabearIf one has to believe Jesus died for one's sins, and was resurrected to be a Christian, isn't that enough for one to be classified as delusional? Not necessarily. First, it's not delusional to believe false things. This happens all the time to the sanest of people. Second, if a belief can be attributed to some claim which is trusted for any apparently justifiable reason rather than to any absurd generation of one's own mind, then we are dealing with a simple case of being mistaken.
While the resurrection story is a lot to swallow, and a lot of people can be faulted for not being appropriately skeptical, I think many naturally stumble over some common thoughts about it when judging the possibility. Many, I believe, think along the lines of "So many of his immediate followers and apostles suffered and died for their beliefs. Though hard to believe, the story's truth is the only explanation that makes sense of their behavior. The rational thing to do is to believe." Many are also told things by trusted authorities which are simply untrue. Just because there exist good arguments against such reasoning, it doesn't mean falling for it makes one delusional.
Redhunter wrote:What else do you call the denial of reality? Geology, science, space exploration and tons of other things have proven many of the "facts" of the bible wrong, yet some will still cling to the words in a book, despite overwhelming evidence. That's not crazy?
AMOS:I have to disagree with you. While what you describe is crazy and is a religious pathology, this doesn't mean that religion is itself pathological. I think one can go too far in making that kind of generalization. Surely there are Christians you know which you consider sane, rational, virtuous, but simply mistaken.
I see christians who go to church because they want to look good in their community, but don't practice what they preach. And I know plenty of other people who come across as sane, until they start talking about angels, devils, spirits; they might as well talk about elves and ogres, they don't fucking exist.
Tens of thousands of religions have claimed to be "the one", and none have been. It's an outdated idea, held together with tradition, holidays and a big 'ole helping of denial. The core stories of christianity are plagerized! How is believing in that, sane? If you believe this, and do not know the history of your bible and it's writers/characters, then you are mindlessly going with the flow and not thinking for yourself. Either way, there is something mentally off.
How ofter does prayer not work? People still do it, despite their lack of response to it.
And Amos, I'm having trouble with this; "First, it's not delusional to believe false things."
What does that mean? Someone's father dies, it's not delusional or some mental defect that makes one beleive taht they are still alive?
Believing in something, that you either don't know to be true, or you know to be false, IS delusion. False belief=Delusion. It's that simple.
Believing in things that you don't know to be true is not delusional. Say I go camping in the wilderness for a week. A family member dies but no one can contact me to inform me. I assume they are still alive, its wrong but I am not delusional.
I won't even go into my opinion on this, I'll simply go with the following:
Point 1:
@Distind:
In case you hadn't noticed, a fair number of people here agree that this sentiment was overdone. And nobody forced FSTDT to post this comment; it was submitted and accepted. So I would hope that you would see that the site at least strives to be fair. never been there summed it up nicely.
<< While the resurrection story is a lot to swallow, and a lot of people can be faulted for not being appropriately skeptical, I think many naturally stumble over some common thoughts about it when judging the possibility. Many, I believe, think along the lines of "So many of his immediate followers and apostles suffered and died for their beliefs. Though hard to believe, the story's truth is the only explanation that makes sense of their behavior. The rational thing to do is to believe." Many are also told things by trusted authorities which are simply untrue. Just because there exist good arguments against such reasoning, it doesn't mean falling for it makes one delusional. >>Amos: Were you on the O.J. defense team, by any chance?
~David D.G.
never been there
Not saying every, single self-proclaimed christian is ripe for the nuthouse, however, the core beliefs of christianity are based on events which didn't or couldn't happen. If you believe in zombies, virgin births and all of the rest of the things that only happen in ancient fairy tales, then you are deluded. Not all mental illness is completely crippling, but there are many mental cripples who only have a small bit of the real picture and don't wnat to know the rest. They are comfortable. How is that not different from the man who gets drunk everyday to escape reality and avoid responsibilty? At least booze will work every time.
@Redhunter
Tens of thousands of religions have claimed to be "the one", and none have been. It's an outdated idea, held together with tradition, holidays and a big 'ole helping of denial. The core stories of christianity are plagerized! How is believing in that, sane? It depends on what exactly people are believing, how they're going about it, and what you mean by "sane" or "in delusion." I looked up "delusion" on wikipedia and found these criteria: * certainty (held with absolute conviction) I can point to large numbers of Christians that consider their beliefs anything but certain, and increasingly uncertain the more specific the claims get. I can also point to large numbers of Christians that regularly make concessions when evidence comes in. True, they don't abandon their beliefs when we think they should, but they do at least modify them to be fairly consistent with the evidence. Only the last point applies, which isn't enough to call them insane or deluded.
@David D.G.Were you on the O.J. defense team, by any chance? Is that a good thing or a bad thing? They were good, but they were also lawyers.
Hmmm...not excited about blanket statements, in general. Self delusion is certainly a mental illness. I guess you could say that's the logical conclusion, for a person presented with the facts, who rejects them in favor of a popular story.
Amos: I was somewhat obliquely chiding you for obfuscatory language and outrageous stretches of logic in pursuit of your "defense" of religious belief.
@David D.G.
Seriously, I think you try too hard for a compromise between religion and reality here. As others have pointed out before, if I say 2+2=4 and someone else says 2+2=6, it does not help to compromise by saying 2+2=5. Reality does not accept compromises. I think the religious are completely wrong. What I've been arguing about is in what way they're wrong and if every religious person is wrong in the same way. How is that a compromise? You're really coming out of left field with this.But if they're going to believe in something completely contradicted by reality, then they should be honest enough to admit this candidly; and if they do not admit this and recognize the possibility (more like the probability) that they are wrong, or especially if they CANNOT because they are absolutely convinced that they are right, then that, in my book, counts as delusional. Of course. I started out arguing in this thread agreeing that what you just described is delusional. I think I even repeated that once or twice and nothing I've written has contradicted that position. I thought I made it very clear that in my arguments I was defending an entirely different (but real) way of being religious, one which does admit when it's wrong on each verifiable claim. I defended this way only so far as to say that this way is still wrong, just not delusional.
I'm sorry if my writing wasn't clear. Perhaps it's my fault that your depiction of what I said was inaccurate. If you don't like the logic of the arguments, I beg you to point out a flaw. But right now, it looks like the only thing we disagree on may be what we think I'm saying.
I wouldn't go that far, chiefly because I'm one of them. However, some variants of Christianity, like a staunch belief in an imminent rapture, are clearly padded room-grade insanity.
If we're so mentally ill how come we're all happy and you're all in jail, on drugs, dying from AIDS, miserable all the time and with no hope whatsoever? You are empty and useless even to yourselves. And you think WE are mentally ill? Fuck you.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
