True or false: religious people are mentally ill purely by virtue of being religious?

[Htom Sirveaux]

In other words, is being religious being mentally ill, regardless of any other considerations?

14 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	True
	5 (36%)
	False
	9 (64%)
	Other (please explain)
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. A study in the 70s found that the

stronger a person's self-reported feeling of religious beliefs, the higher the incidence of mental illness. It was impossible to tell whether religion was some form of self-medication, or if the crazy ideas in their two part fairy tale drove them crazy.

[cbayer]

3. I would like a link to that study because I am going to say right now that it is utter bullshit.

[Brettongarcia]

80. Here's a simple encylopedia intro to religion as "delusion," linking it to mental illness

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_delusion

[cbayer]

81. Here's an article on why you should be very wary of using wikipedia as a source for religious topics

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218147209

[Brettongarcia]

86. Here's our latest professional psychological article linking Religion to Delusion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218147240

[cbayer]

87. Sorry, not interested in anything posted by that member.

[cbayer]

88. Oh, wait! I took a look at this article just to see and….

it's self-published, not peer reviewed and not replicated. It is a philosophical stance that is consistent with this psychologists other philosophical stances.

In short, it isn't science and it is wholly irrational to hold it up as evidence of anything. But some dogmatic believers will grab whatever they can to make a point, even if it's totally garbage.

[Brettongarcia]

90. It's in "Evolution and Cognition," 2004, indexed in Academia.edu. It cites Freud and ...

... more recent corroborating literature by say, M. Davies among others. Who in turn published in the prestigious Blackwell publications. As well as "Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology."

Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology. Which are "garbage" in the words of cbayer?

The article's basic orientation seems corroborated by much serious literature. Including not only classic sources like Freud. But also say Dein's "Religion and Psychosis," in Transcultural Psychiatry; published by the respected "Sage" Publishers, 2011. This publication is probably too new to be corroborated, in turn; having been available only since 2011. But about two months ago we cited dozens of articles in professional psychiatry journals corroborating the basic ideas.

Clearly there is now a whole school of thought in the field of Psychology, supporting the notion that major elements - or even all of - religion, is related to psychopathology. Especially to schizophrenia. And specifically and by name, to "delusions."

Possibly some of this had not yet impacted in the world of applied medicine and nursing. However, this is now a major school of thought in advanced academic research.

[cbayer]

95. Ah, Evolution and Cognition. The esteemed publication of the Konrad Lorenz Institute.

2004 was the last time they published anything and there is no evidence of peer review.

I find it absolutely stunning how people who rant and rave about reality, rationality and science will post the most ludicrous bits of non-science available on the internet.

The article is worthless in terms of proving anything. It is not science, it is opinion based on non-evidence based theoretical concepts. It's just like religion!

BTW, Freud and this article do not represent whole new schools of thought. You keep banging that drum, though.

Yes, religion is just like schizophrenia. Together, we can find a cure.

I am done discussing this.

[Htom Sirveaux]

4. Not what I'm asking.

My question asks whether religion itself is a mental illness (and thus whether all religious people are mentally ill) apart from any other mental illnesses which may also be present

[BainsBane]

6. You think 90 percent of the world's population is mentally ill

and you are among the few sane ones?

I'd say anyone that posts a poll like this their own issues to deal with.

[pipoman]

13. Yep

[Htom Sirveaux]

32. Why did you assume you knew what my own answer to the poll would be? nt

[BainsBane]

41. Well, I was taken back by the idea such a poll would even be posted

That someone could conceive of such an idea. It wouldn't occur to me to make that comment about any group of people, even the pro-gun crowd, with whom I have very strong disagreements. In addition to conveying bigotry toward the religious, it is offensive to the mentally ill who are long tired of having their medical condition used as an insult.

So I guess I don't know that it matters so much which answer you select. That you posted it was enough to disturb me. When I saw it under latest threads it prompted me to come into a room I have only entered perhaps twice before.

[Htom Sirveaux]

48. Well, now we know that at least eleven people can conceive of this idea.

Or at least are comfortable with appearing to agree with it (even if it's just for trolling purposes).

[stone space]

55. I suspect that the poll was posted because...

...there is a small group of dedicated anti-theists here who rather unfortunately push this thesis continually here at DU, and who believe that in doing so, they are acting as the voice of atheism.

[BainsBane]

59. I see

That only confirms my view to avoid this segment of DU. I am entirely non-committal on matters of religion, other than the fact I believe everyone has a right to worship or not worship as they choose. I find bigotry of all varieties completely unacceptable.

[rug]

19. Well, an unattributed 40 year study.

I'm convinced.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

26. Good thing, too.

I am sure that funding requests more recently would fly right through this congress.

[cbayer]

73. So, are you going to produce a link to the study or not?

[On the Road]

130. Imagine that There is an Identifiable Group of Mentally Ill People with Religious Delusions

and a much larger group of religious people who have no symptoms of mental illness.

Sampling those two groups would show a positive correlation between mental illness and religious delusion. However, in no way does it demonstrate that religious causes mental illness or is a form of mental illness.

And of course it was "impossible to tell" cause and effect -- that kind of a study doesn't attempt to address causation.

[ZombieHorde]

2. False.

There is a large difference between being mentally ill and believing something without evidence.

[BainsBane]

7. Like believing religious belief equates with mental illness

without evidence.

[PeteSelman]

5. I don't think it necessarily makes you nuts.

But I do wonder why otherwise intelligent people buy into superstition and mythology so hard. They can read all the Greek Myths and realize they're just stories but the Bible? Forgetaboutit, absolutely true.

It's irrational but not necessarily insane.

[carolinayellowdog]

18. realizing they're just stories doesn't equate to irreligion

Just as knowing the difference between the fiction and non-fiction section of the library doesn't equate to the considering them the "all lies" versus "all truth" section.

I don't have much respect for either the Abrahamic or the Indic traditions' claims that this or that historical individual was the Greatest Spiritual Authority Ever. But as Hermeticist, I find more truth in the Hermetic literature-- KNOWING that a bunch of individuals in the Hellenistic era attributed their individual insights to a nonexistent divine author-- than in either the Abrahamic or the Indic spiritual traditions.

One can be historically sane and skeptical and yet religious.

[BainsBane]

8. Atheism is taught in the religious studies program

at the university where I work. Just sayin.

[cbayer]

74. That's great. There is more and more of that happening.

Atheism is not a religion, of course, but it is a position held regarding religion. The more that people understand it and are exposed to it, the more acceptable it will become.

As for the bigots who think all believers have a psychiatric illness, we can just file the with those that use the terms gay and retarded to describe those they don't agree with.

[BlueJazz]

9. Perhaps it's more Wishful Thinking than anything else.

There just HAS to be some way that I'm going to live, in some form, forever.

[meti57b]

115. There is a way:..... time is infinite.

In that endless infinity, everything there is now, will at some time, be created again. You will exist as you are now, and maybe also in ways that are almost like you are now. In between those existences, you will not exist and will have no perception of the gazillions of years that go by.

[BlueJazz]

128. Well..I certainly hope I turn out better the next time I come around.

Also: I was thinking maybe I could send myself a note. (Do NOT date Karen in college)

[meti57b]

129. LOL!!!

[edhopper]

10. False

belief in things that aren't true is not mental illness.
This is bullshit strawman when they say that believers are deluded, using that term in the strictest sense.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

34. Delusion is not only a medical term.

It's a generic term for simply holding strong belief in something despite contrary evidence.

So, for instance, the Republican belief in supply side economics is a delusion, without actually requiring any of those who believe in it to be 'mentally ill'.

(Edit: And, I just looked around, and the DSM IV specifically excludes religious doctrine from its definition of pathological delusion, according to an article at pubmed. I don't have my copy handy, so I don't know the exact wording.)

[edhopper]

49. Yeah

That's what I was saying.

[cbayer]

76. But that is not how delusion is being used in this poll.

It is clearly being used in the psychiatric context.

Colloquial use is a different issue.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

91. Was the poll wording edited?

Because at the time I read the OP (and still now) the word 'delusion' never shows up in it. It was a commenter who brought that up.

I would agree that delusions, whether religious or not, can result from organic pathologies. But I don't think (although I could be wrong) that the OP was claiming that his proclamation of religion as mental illness was limited to delusions.

In re the OP, btw, if you were to agree with that supposition, you would have to classify any child brought up as religious as being 'mentally ill'. Or, to expand it logically, to classify as 'mentally ill' anyone who was convinced to believe any set of incorrect or unprovable beliefs. As I mentioned above, we would have to classify 'supply-siders' as mentally ill in that case.

You can believe unlikely, untrue, unproven, or even unproveable things without being mentally ill. Heck, didn't Descartes suggest that we should believe just to be 'safe'? If we believe and we're right, we benefit. If we don't believe and we're wrong, we get punished. If we believe and we're wrong, we lose nothing. If we don't believe, and we're right, we don't gain.

I wouldn't think Descartes was mentally ill, just cynical.

[cbayer]

98. You are correct. The term "mental illness" was used and delusion was brought

up in that context.

The OP is a believer who does not think religious belief is a mental illness. They posted to make a point.

Anyone who agrees with that supposition is more likely to meet the actual definition of delusional than a religious person. They are espousing a belief that has no basis in reality and much data that contradicts it. They are similar to flat earth believers, climate change deniers and creationists.

I agree that one can believe all kinds of things without evidence and not be remotely mentally ill. That is what religious belief is all about.

The scenario you bring up is Pascal's wager, which was submitted by the French philosopher Blaise Pascal.

"God is, or He is not"
A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions.
You must wager (it is not optional).
Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.
Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.
But some cannot believe. They should then 'at least learn your inability to believe...' and 'Endeavour then to convince' themselves.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

100. I can't keep my French guys straight ;) nt

[cbayer]

103. I once had trouble keeping my french guys straight!

But that was during the heady days of my youth.

Ah, fond memories.

[cbayer]

75. Belief in things that aren't true? What exactly isn't true?

Would that be the things that you don't believe in but have no evidence that they don't exist in some form?

[trotsky]

11. I think the more important question is...

when does a religious belief stop being a religious belief, and become a symptom of mental illness?

[pipoman]

12. Religious bigotry, the last bastion for the haters...

[hrmjustin]

14. So to those who voted yes am I mentally ill because I am a believer?

[upaloopa]

15. Well none of these posters are doctors and

I don't think religious belief is listed in the medical books as mental illness so unless you intend to let other DUers do your thinking for you, I would chalk this OP up to mind fucking.

[rug]

20. Looks that way. Nine current DUers think all religious DUers are mentally ill.

[hrmjustin]

21. And there are some who think if we challenge this we are showing our religious entitlement.

[rug]

22. I'm sure someone somwhere considers that to be a rational argument.

[hrmjustin]

23. Oh I ran into it a little while ago.

[TygrBright]

16. And "mentally ill" is a negative thing to be?

Listen to yourselves, people.

What if this poll had been: "Is being religious a form of heart disease?" "Is being religious automatically the same as having asthma?" "Is being religious synonymous with cancer?"

Could we kindly stop automatically equating mental illness with intellectual inferiority and/or social depravity?

disgustedly,
Bright

[Warren Stupidity]

28. If religiousness was indistinguishable from a heart attack you might have a point.

[cbayer]

77. That's what makes it even more objectionable.

It's like calling things/people that you don't like gay or retarded. It's an attempt to equate those that are different than you with something really, really bad.

I share your disgust.

[Starboard Tack]

83. Being ill is usually considered a negative, be it heart disease or a headache.

As you may have noticed, 17 people, so far, consider religiosity a mental disorder. I don't think anyone mentioned "intellectual inferiority and/or social depravity". Maybe you have some point you'd like to share regarding that.

[rock]

17. No. You have it on the opinion of an atheist

That's a slippery slope. If I take it I have to declare about half the population insane right off the bat (for being repiggies, with their crazy ideas), then get to the religious!

[Warren Stupidity]

24. The claim is not that religious people are mentally ill, but that religious beliefs are delusional.

They may or may not be symptomatic of other mental illnesses.

Another difficulty with the diagnosis of delusions is that almost all of these features can be found in "normal" beliefs. Many religious beliefs hold exactly the same features, yet are not universally considered delusional. These factors have led the psychiatrist Anthony David to note that "there is no acceptable (rather than accepted) definition of a delusion."[22] In practice, psychiatrists tend to diagnose a belief as delusional if it is either patently bizarre, causing significant distress, or excessively pre-occupying the patient, especially if the person is subsequently unswayed in belief by counter-evidence or reasonable arguments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusion

As noted elsewhere, the DSM just makes this giant carve out for religious beliefs. The problem is that 'all of these features can be found in "normal" beliefs' where "normal" means "religious. So what are we to make of this?

It seems here we effectively vote on which religious delusions are normal enough to garner the outrage when noted that they are delusions, and then the others, those outside the majority view, are fair game for the dreaded label of "delusion".

My own view is that we are indoctrinated in delusional belief systems as children, those beliefs are reinforced by community peer pressure, and are thus, absurd and nonsensical as they are, considered "normal". Those of us raised outside this bubble of mass delusion look in on it with a mix of horror, amusement, incomprehension, and fascination. I can still remember when it dawned on me that people actually believed this stuff.

It is, again in my opinion, only a mental illness if one considers the sort of mass delusional behavior exhibited in for example totalitarian states "mental illness".

What would one consider Jonestown? Or Heaven's Gate? Or the Waco Koresh cult? Mental illness? Mass delusions? Normal behavior?

[Htom Sirveaux]

25. We could be equally consistent by dropping the term delusional altogether.

Then there would be no carve out, no need to vote on which beliefs are normal enough to avoid the label. Certainly it doesn't seem to bring much clarity according to that psychiatrist you quoted.

[Warren Stupidity]

27. I'm fine with delusion as a word to describe beliefs that are unsustainable but held with firm

conviction. If you can think of a better word, let me know. You haven't volunteered one.

[Htom Sirveaux]

29. That's a self-negating definition.

If beliefs are capable of being sustained by firm conviction, then they would not be unsustainable, would they? Why not simply "mistaken", "wrong", "false", etc. You could combine those words with others like "persistent" or "stubborn" or "resistant" to fully capture what you seem to be trying to express.

[Warren Stupidity]

42. nope delusional believes are held with firm conviction despite being unsustainable.

"A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary."

You know, like believing that a radio in your tooth is talking to you, despite there being no evidence of a radio in your tooth.

[Htom Sirveaux]

45. Then the assertion "God is a delusion" involves

a positive claim of superior evidence to the contrary, that is, for God's non-existence. Doesn't that take us into "gnostic" atheism according to that chart you frequently post?

[Warren Stupidity]

47. No more so than other magical invisible beings, faeries or leprechauns for example.

There is no evidence at all for the existence of the standard deity concept, plenty of good reasons why such an entity is wildly improbable, and the only reason people make the sort of silly argument you are attempting is that "god" claims get some special exemption that leprechaun claims don't. I don't know with absolute certainty that a leprechaun might not manifest its existence tomorrow, but I am massively confident that a person claiming to be intimately familiar with leprechauns is either lying or having delusions. If a leprechaun shows up tomorrow I'll change my beliefs.

[Htom Sirveaux]

62. That analogy comes loaded with assumptions that presuppose your conclusion.

Probably the biggest one is that the "standard deity concept" is a literal, cartoonish understanding of the one depicted in the Bible. The second biggest one is that a deity couldn't possibly be real because science will eventually overturn that idea by explaining everything, or else invalidate any other kind of explanation merely by existing (since God functions as an explanation for the existence of the universe in a way that leprechauns do not, a probable next move is to declare that the universe will eventually get a scientific explanation just like rainbows, lightning, thunder, etc. did).

So yeah, if you want to say "God is a delusion", you'll have to bring forth the positive superior evidence of non-existence as implied by the definition of "delusion" that you yourself offered (and that analogy didn't even begin to satisfy).

That's not privilege, that's merely expecting consistency.

[Dorian Gray]

43. You're delusional

if you think you're not going to offend people by calling them delusional.

[Warren Stupidity]

50. I am making no attempt here to not offend people.

Given the history here, where people can be told to "fuck off you fucking fucker" and other people make apologies for that behavior and blame the recipient of that sort of attack, "not offending" is not my objective. Their delicate sensibilities with respect to their religious beliefs are not my problem.

[Dorian Gray]

53. Well

there you go then.

[hrmjustin]

51. And if we fight back we are just showing our religious privilege.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=147073

[cleanhippie]

93. Denialism is fighting back?

[hrmjustin]

94. Denial of what?

[cleanhippie]

96. Exactly.

Keep up the good fight.

[hrmjustin]

97. You can't even answer the question.

So in your mind we have to just sit there and take it?

[cleanhippie]

99. How can you be "fighting back" if you don't even know what you're "fighting back" against?

You link to a thread where you claim to be "fighting back" but seemingly have no idea just what it is you're "fighting back" against?

That's either extreme ignorance or complete denialism.

[hrmjustin]

101. ok I am done.

You can't answer the question I am not going to bother. Go ahead and have the last word if you want but I am not continuing.

[cleanhippie]

102. Lol

[rug]

117. Go on, ask me.

[chrisstopher]

30. I honestly don't get religion

So maybe I'm the crazy one.
Who knows?

[CAG]

31. Oh, yeah!! Some atheists get to call "religious people" mentally ill, delusional, stupid, ignorant,

etc, etc, for the umpteenth time on DU today. Meanwhile, religious people are just supposed to sit back and take the attempts at humiliation yet again, because if they say something snarky back then they get the typical comments of "how Christian of you", etc, etc.

Doing the same thing over and over and over again....

[hrmjustin]

33. Apparently if we fight back we are showing our religious entitlement.

[CAG]

39. Well, geez, its hard to argue with such smart folk, ya know, cuz us believers

are just such simpletons. Simpletons like Barack Obama, Michelle Obama, Jimmy Carter, Rosalynn Carter, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders (professor of religion), JFK, RFK, Teddy Kennedy, MLK Jr, Rosa Parks, Gandhi, LBJ, FDR. What a bunch of mentally ill fools!! If only they were as smart and sane as some of these DU atheists who remind us how much smarter they are than all of us constantly!

[hrmjustin]

40. Wait now, according to some Obama is too cool to be a believer.

I didn't know that about Sanders.

[CAG]

44. That's true, in fact, most of those named are probably just faking it for votes...you'll see that

claim over and over around here, too.

[hrmjustin]

46. Yet if we fight back we are the bad guys.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

54. Bernie Sanders is Jewish; I couldn't find anything

indicating he was ever a professor of (any) religion.

[CAG]

58. sociology, sorry

[Goblinmonger]

89. Bernie Sanders

has come out as an atheist. He says he never saw any discrimination. That was used by many in this room to say there is no discrimination.

[Warren Stupidity]

85. delusional, yes, the rest of your list, not really.

But go ahead and feel upset about imagined insults, why not, after all believing in imagined nonsense is perfectly acceptable.

[rug]

118. As is evident from your posts.

[Curmudgeoness]

35. What a ridiculous question.

Religious people are not mentally ill. They may have been indoctrinated. They may defend beliefs without a shred of evidence. But they are not mentally ill. And that is a terrible question. I assume that anyone who voted "yes" is just making a sarcastic comment on this poll.

[hrmjustin]

36. I don't know about all of those who voted yes but one of them posts all the time about this.

[Curmudgeoness]

37. If anyone is stating it in this exact way,

they are trying to get your goat.

[hrmjustin]

38. I am afraid not.

[cbayer]

78. Hah! I wish that were true, but it most definitely is not.

[agbdf]

52. As an observant Jew, I would have to disagree.

[demwing]

56. These people are bigots

if they stand behind their stated position that religious belief is a symptom of mental illness:

4now, Tribalceltic, MrMickeysMom, Applan, BlueJazz, dballance, Brettongarcia, ChairmanAgnostic, Politicalboi, on point, phil89, lstacyb

Bigots, each.

[okasha]

135. And then there's Warren Stupidity,

who voted "no" but has been relentlessly pushing this nitwittish meme all day.

Obviously we have a case of cognitive dissonance here.

[Politicalboi]

57. I know I'm sick of living in my own country

Where we're supposed to have separation of church and state but we have the word god on "our" money. Don't like it, tough shit. We consider religious rights right up their with civil rights. They are nowhere near each other. NOBODY needs religion to live. If you never were exposed as a child, you would never care. I would give anything to live in a world without ANY religion. Only a do unto others attitude.

[CAG]

61. "We consider religious rights right up their (sic) with civil rights.

They are nowhere near each other."

Care to expand?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

[Politicalboi]

66. I mean we can live without religion

We can't live without air to breathe or food to eat. We can't live without the one we love no matter who that is. IMO that's a real right. People "beliefs" I can do without. Beliefs are not facts, or food. We need less religion in our government. I think that's what pisses me off the most. We see the crazies in congress who want to push their religion down our throats with law. Instead of locking those loons up, they can run for congress or any high office. And they get elected. These loons spoil the whole pickle barrel.

"Or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" They've taken it too far. When it's taken seriously in government we've gone too far. Go shout your beliefs in the street not in government.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," But they do, and we're supposed to just accept it. How many abortion clinic closure are due to religious nuts? We do honor religion in government, only they reword it.

[CAG]

68. I don't think you'll find much argument here about separation of church and state.

Its the other stuff that may need some expounding on.

"we can live without religion"; that statement just doesn't have any practicality to it, what do we do with a statement like that? I could live without Burger King, but the Burger King owners have every right to own Burger King and the employees have every right to have a job there and the customers have every right to eat there, and the non-customers have every right to eat somewhere else. What does that have to do with anything??

[demwing]

133. And dark skinned people can live without

drinking from the same water fountains, or eating at the same lunch counters, or using the same restrooms, or going to the schools, or voting by the same rules as light skinned people.

Does that make it right to deny them any of the above?

[CAG]

136. slightly more effective argument than my Burger King obsession.. :-)

[Iggo]

60. NTSA.

[MellowDem]

63. Yes...

But since mental illness is such a subjective concept, it's pretty useless, just an opinion. However, given how delusions are defined, it would qualify easily. In fact, the only difference between a religious delusion and another delusion is the amount of privilege religion has.

Also, most people suffer from mental illness at some time in life. All the believers who are so offended for having their delusions pointed out as delusions are indeed offended because of their privilege, and must also think pretty poorly if the mentally ill.

They have a hard time confronting criticism of a sacred cow due to their entitlement.

[rug]

65. Is that what you think?

You must not remember the spate of posts from your compadres about schizophrenic women killing their children. If you weren't so blinded by your bigotry toward religion and your eagerness to announce it in your internet poll vote, you'd remember the objection to using the mentally ill as another convenient weapon in that crusade.

[MellowDem]

120. The mentally ill aren't being used

In a crusade against religion. Religious people are labeling others mentally ill but then don't apply the same standards to their religious beliefs. It's pointing out the hypocrisy

[rug]

121. Of course they are.

You posit religion is bad. You then posit mental illness is bad. You then compare the former to the latter.

It's too transparent.

[Htom Sirveaux]

67. To sum up:

"Religious people are mentally ill" is a useless and subjective opinion, but the only reason believers would disagree with it is that they are too biased, and also that they look down on mentally ill people?

[MellowDem]

122. On its own it is useless...

What's really being got at is whether a belief is harmful. So the term is useless in that what it's defined as depends completely on subjective ideas. Now, based on the definition of delusion, religion is a delusion, but many believers deny that, which is hypocritical.

[immoderate]

64. "The purpose of psychiatry is to provide a convenient vocabulary for insulting people."

- -Thomas Szazz


--imm

[cbayer]

79. And that is profoundly insulting to those that suffer with serious psychiatric illnesses

and those that care for them.

Thomas Szasz was a Randian libertarian of the worst type. His philosophy about psychiatric illness is a disgrace.

[Brettongarcia]

92. Should people with mental illness be only positively reinforced? Told their illness is good?

How about sociopathic murderers? Should you NEVER send a critical word in their direction?

[notgoinback]

69. Not mentally ill, just overly optimistic.

My advice to devoutly religious people who want to remain faithful ? DON'T be like me and read Christopher Hitchens book "God is Not Great"!

[Htom Sirveaux]

70. I take it this means you lost your faith thanks to that book?

If so, what was it that you found so convincing?

[Skittles]

82. logic

[carolinayellowdog]

71. spending vast amounts of time attacking strangers online strikes me as symptomatic

of some kind of disorder. Adopting a trollish username making it clear that relentless aggression is one's purpose is even more indicative.

Obnoxious Personality Disorder?

I've suffered far more of this kind of thing from the religious attacking the skeptical, personally, but at DU it seems to be largely in the opposite direction.

[cbayer]

72. Those that believe this to be true are expressing bigotry both against

religious people and those with true psychiatric disorders.

It's like calling things "gay" or "retarded". It's a tactic of the simple-minded and a sign of tremendous personal insecurity.

People are different than you? Call them something you think is really bad.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

[Dorian Gray]

84. If I were arguing

that religious belief is delusional but not indicative of mental illness (like in the other thread), I'd be pissed at the 17 people who voted yes on this poll.

[JNelson6563]

104. I think it is more tied in to emotional development

than anything. It is an emotional bond to a false sense of security and one's level of dependency is determinded by their emotional age or IQ, as it were. I have noticed, on a personal level, those who get pretty zealous about religion tend to rather immature emotionally. On the other hand, the more laid back a believer, they always turn out to be rather mature emotionally.

Of course there are levels zealotry and I think most here can agree that some of the very zealous are probably mentally. Obsessional behavior is never healthy behavior.

Julie

[cbayer]

105. Let me make sure I have this right.

You are saying there is a correlation between religion and a person's emotional IQ. Is that right?

I think you may have a point in terms of zealotry and I think you can apply that to many areas, including non-belief. Certainly that seems to be the case on both religious and atheist sites that cater to those who are on the extremes.

I would agree that some of the zealots are more likely to have underlying issues. Becoming obsessed with things, be it belief or non-belief, is likely not healthy, though there are degrees of obsession.

But most believers and non-believers show no evidence of mental illness and there isn't a lick of data that would show that one group is more psychiatrically healthy than the other.

[JNelson6563]

116. I consider emotional IQ seperate from psychological health.

Though to be sure not many with low emotional IQ are able to outgrow their narcissism.

Julie

[cbayer]

123. So, you don't see low emotional IQ as a psychiatric issue, just as a trait?

I can agree with that.

How does emotional IQ relate to narcissism? I don't see any connection at all.

[DrewFlorida]

106. Actually their supposed belief in religion is just one of the manifestations of their insanity....

they are alternately shameless and shameful, all powerful and powerless. The power of thinking you know everything about things that are beyond human knowledge, yet that power is held by your imaginary human-like being or you have control of things which are beyond human control, with a simple prayer you can make it be the way you wish but the power to grant that prayer is controlled by your imaginary human-like being. You have original sin and need to beget your shame with worship to the imaginary human-like being, yet if you worship you are now without shame and therefore better than those who haven't worshipped the imaginary human-like being!

Yeah they are insane, but religion isn't the cause, rather religion is one of the ways we know they are insane.

[cbayer]

109. Yes, of course. Over 80% of the people on this planet are insane.

Generalize much? You post is despicable.

[Warren Stupidity]

113. How would you describe the mental state of the population of Germany

circa 1932 - 1945?

[rug]

119. Of course, the Third Reich was established to promote religion.

Complete idiocy.

[stone space]

107. How did you manage to avoid having this poll hidden?

My poll was quite similar, and it didn't make it past the first few minutes.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: One of your posts has been hidden by a DU Jury

Mail Message



On Tue Aug 19, 2014, 07:41 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

True or false?: Atheists are mentally ill purely by virtue of being atheists.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218147328

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Atheists are mentally ill by virtue if being atheists? This is disruptive flamebait and is what makes DU suck more.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Tue Aug 19, 2014, 07:43 AM, and voted 7-0 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I agree with the alerter, disruptive flame bait doesn't belong here.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Typical divisive insult from this member. Hide it.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Why was this posted? If there was some context that someone said this, some asshat on tv, then fine, but just by itself it's flamebait...hide.

CONSEQUENCES OF THIS DECISION

You will no longer be able to participate in this discussion thread, and you will not be able to start a new discussion thread in this forum until 8:43 AM. This hidden post has been added to your <a href="/?com=profile&uid=313825&sub=trans">Transparency page</a>.

IMPORTANT: Hidden posts remain on your Transparency Page for 90 days. If at any time your Transparency Page contains five or more hidden posts there are additional consequences: 1) your Transparency Page will be displayed and can be read by any logged-in member, 2) you will be unable to post until there are fewer than five hidden posts remaining on your Transparency Page, 3) if you are a forum or group Host and/or serving on the Malicious Intruder Removal Team (MIRT), you will lose those privileges.

[TM99]

108. Well, obviously it is proof positive

of religious privilege here at DU.

This is why the anti-religious nimwits are just bullies and instigators. They can dish it out, but if someone throws it right back at them, they whine about being persecuted.

It is now absolutely acceptable to call those who are religious/spiritual/theistic delusional. Such progressiveness makes my heart fill with joy.

[Curmudgeoness]

112. Looks like you inadvertently hit the "sarcasm" smilie. nt

[Goblinmonger]

131. You do know the author of this OP is a believer, right?

I know that messes with your strawman, but it is an important factor.

[stone space]

134. So my poll got deleted because I'm an atheist? (nt)

[cbayer]

110. Well, as has been repeatedly pointed out here, the odds of having a jury that is completely

biased in favor of the religious are indisputable and non-believers are routinely persecuted at the hands of those terrible religionists that dominate this board and carry the mantle of privilege.



There is no privilege. There are only those who feel they are being persecuted and whose perceptions are distorted as a result.

You were trying to make a point and the jury did not see this in context. And the alerters use of "disruptive flame bait" is pretty hilarious.

Anyway, I think you made a mistake by not explaining what you were trying to do. Read with the context of the group, this does look really bad.

[hrmjustin]

111. I would like to see how this is explained away.

So sorry you got a hide.

[stone space]

114. Does anybody have the jury results on the OP?

I understand that it was alerted on and left standing in a 2-5 jury vote.

I'd be fascinated to read the jurors' comments if anybody has them.

[cbayer]

124. Well, the alerter will have them for sure and s/he is probably in this thread.

[stone space]

125. That's my hope. (nt)

[Htom Sirveaux]

126. I would also be fascinated.

This might be my first ever "alerted on" post.

[stone space]

127. It will be a big letdown when...

...somebody posts the jury results and it turns out that none of the jurors left a comment.

[peace13]

132. Kind of a funny way to put it.

My observation in my family is that the more mentally disturbed a person is the more religious they claim to be. And...they act less like Jesus taught us to be than the general population. Go figure. It is frustrating to witness. It seems to get worse over time!