Is Religion A Mental Illness?

[Ende]

The underlined part is the only part I'd disagree with you on. You probably should read what he's saying as it's actually quite relevant to what you're saying.

Again, if you read what I was saying, I did read it. I just tend to read diagonally, and the longer the text gets, the more stuff I miss. I was saying that because I realized I quite may have skipped over something because I don't have all that much time in the day to read things.

....Okay, I'm an idiot and didn't notice that. Sorry about that.

[The Cummunist State]

Again, if you read what I was saying, I did read it. I just tend to read diagonally, and the longer the text gets, the more stuff I miss. I was saying that because I realized I quite may have skipped over something because I don't have all that much time in the day to read things.

....Okay, I'm an idiot and didn't notice that. Sorry about that.

It's fine. Thanks for apologizing!

[Celephais]

Except for 'language', 'minorities', and a few other things, numbers have no effect on definitions.

In the case of insanity it does - not medically per se, but more to the point that one must question the validity of labelling some ridiculously huge number of people as mentally ill/abnormal.

No. Most sensible people are very skeptical about unreasonable things.

Well, you sure presented a persuasive argument!

Most people have some form of mental illness, just because there are so many. Paranoia, autism, OCD... The list goes on.

No, most people do not have some form of mental illness. This is sheer nonsense.

So... to be religeous then?

Any person or society that holds anything irrational as a fervently held belief is "religious"? You are just making up definitions. That is not what "religious" means, and never was.

[Jormengand]

Except for 'language', 'minorities', and a few other things, numbers have no effect on definitions.

In the case of insanity it does - not medically per se, but more to the point that one must question the validity of labelling some ridiculously huge number of people as mentally ill/abnormal.

Question the validity? The onlt validity I need is logic, and definition.

No. Most sensible people are very skeptical about unreasonable things.

Well, you sure presented a persuasive argument!

Shameless hypocrisy I see. Ask nothing, I'll answer nothing.

Most people have some form of mental illness, just because there are so many. Paranoia, autism, OCD... The list goes on.

No, most people do not have some form of mental illness. This is sheer nonsense.

O rly? Well, actually technically everyone is on some level autistic, it's just that some are not very autistic.

So... to be religeous then?

Any person or society that holds anything irrational as a fervently held belief is "religious"? You are just making up definitions. That is not what "religious" means, and never was.

You're right, sorry. I should have said the clearer version for idiots: Most people who hold fervently stupid beliefs are religeous. Some aren't, but it is not fair to say that fervently stupid beliefs are normal in any non-religeous context.

Thank you.

[The Archregimancy]

I was just stating that people saying Hitler was a Atheist and this was the cause for all his atrocities are idiots.

Which is nice.

But since neither Nerv nor myself have said that in this thread - in fact in my case have explicitly clarified we're not saying that - I fail to see what you're getting so worked up about.

I just don't give a shit enough about a dead nazi

Of course you don't.

Incidentally, you do realise what that misspelling in your nation name suggests, don't you.

[Celephais]

Question the validity? The onlt validity I need is logic, and definition.

If you're labelling some oversized supermajority of people as mentally ill then it indicates your definitions of what constitutes mental illness - or your statistics-gathering methods - are flawed.

Shameless hypocrisy I see. Ask nothing, I'll answer nothing.

What the fuck, you're not even making sense. Most "sensible" - whatever that means - people aren't sceptical about everything, this is a fact. If they were then received wisdom and dogmas wouldn't linger as they do.

]O rly? Well, actually technically everyone is on some level autistic, it's just that some are not very autistic.

You misunderstand what the autistic spectrum is, as well as being disingenuous ("most people aren't autistic but somehow this means we're all mentally ill!"). I take it that means you're retracting your claim that most people are mentally ill, which is unsupported by any evidence btw.

]You're right, sorry. I should have said the clearer version for idiots: Most people who hold fervently stupid beliefs are religeous. Some aren't, but it is not fair to say that fervently stupid beliefs are normal in any non-religeous context.

Yes it is. Most people's irrational beliefs have little to do with religion. I live in a very secular country with few religious believers and that doesn't stop people believing all sorts of things without proof, and it's not like atheist communists were bastions of rationality either. The idea that deciding one's religion is false automatically means one becomes rational in all areas of life is… retarded to say the least.

[The Cummunist State]

I was just stating that people saying Hitler was a Atheist and this was the cause for all his atrocities are idiots.

Which is nice.

But since neither Nerv nor myself have said that in this thread - in fact in my case have explicitly clarified we're not saying that - I fail to see what you're getting so worked up about.

I just don't give a shit enough about a dead nazi

Of course you don't.

Incidentally, you do realise what that misspelling in your nation name suggests, don't you.

1. I agreed with you. I'm done talking about this.
2. I did not misspell my nation's name. It's a intentional joke.

[Jormengand]

Question the validity? The onlt validity I need is logic, and definition.

If you're labelling some oversized supermajority of people as mentally ill then it indicates your definitions of what constitutes mental illness - or your statistics-gathering methods - are flawed.

Actually I was using a dictionary definition.

Shameless hypocrisy I see. Ask nothing, I'll answer nothing.

What the fuck, you're not even making sense. Most "sensible" - whatever that means - people aren't sceptical about everything, this is a fact. If they were then received wisdom and dogmas wouldn't linger as they do.

No, they aren't skeptical about everything, which is why I didn't say that.

]O rly? Well, actually technically everyone is on some level autistic, it's just that some are not very autistic.

You misunderstand what the autistic spectrum is, as well as being disingenuous ("most people aren't autistic but somehow this means we're all mentally ill!"). I take it that means you're retracting your claim that most people are mentally ill, which is unsupported by any evidence btw.

Actually, I did my research on the mental condition that I happen to have, and I'm right. Thanks. And I didn't say I was retracting it, only supporting it.

]You're right, sorry. I should have said the clearer version for idiots: Most people who hold fervently stupid beliefs are religeous. Some aren't, but it is not fair to say that fervently stupid beliefs are normal in any non-religeous context.

Yes it is. Most people's irrational beliefs have little to do with religion. I live in a very secular country with few religious believers and that doesn't stop people believing all sorts of things without proof, and it's not like atheist communists were bastions of rationality either. The idea that deciding one's religion is false automatically means one becomes rational in all areas of life is… retarded to say the least.

Retarded? Just as well I didn't say it then.

It honestly seems that you're making up stuff I didn't say, so let's stop the argument here, perhaps?

[Raeyh]

Most people have some form of mental illness, just because there are so many. Paranoia, autism, OCD... The list goes on.

It's not considered a mental illness unless it poses a serious problem to your day-to-day life.

[The Alma Mater]

Most people have some form of mental illness, just because there are so many. Paranoia, autism, OCD... The list goes on.

It's not considered a mental illness unless it poses a serious problem to your day-to-day life.

What if it poses a serious problem to the day-to-day life of other people ?

Because maybe Dave feels awesome for bathing in liquid poo daily.. but the people that have to smell him might disagree

[Jormengand]

Most people have some form of mental illness, just because there are so many. Paranoia, autism, OCD... The list goes on.

It's not considered a mental illness unless it poses a serious problem to your day-to-day life.

O RLY?

Mental disorders are generally defined by a combination of how a person feels, acts, thinks or perceives.

[The Alma Mater]

Question the validity? The onlt validity I need is logic, and definition.

If you're labelling some oversized supermajority of people as mentally ill then it indicates your definitions of what constitutes mental illness - or your statistics-gathering methods - are flawed.

Why ?
If in a few years 90% of the human population has AIDS or Cancer... do we call them healthy and the remaining 10% ill ?

[Jormengand]

If you're labelling some oversized supermajority of people as mentally ill then it indicates your definitions of what constitutes mental illness - or your statistics-gathering methods - are flawed.

Why ?
If in a few years 90% of the human population has AIDS or Cancer... do we call them healthy and the remaining 10% ill ?

Another sensible person on this thread!? Thank you, good sir!

[Greater Evil Imperial Japanese Dystopia]

I thought of something.

If matter cannot be created nor destroyed, (ignoring the religious concept), then my theory for the big explosion would be that it started perhaps as a small star which had a massive nuclear chain reaction then exploded, spreading its debris across the universe whilst over time they transformed into different things, evolving into planets, moons, galaxies, etcetera.

Furthermore what I am also implying is that the universe was compressed in a small highly reactive neutron star or something along those lines before exploding.

Does anyone have thoughts or opinions on this theory?

Why ?
If in a few years 90% of the human population has AIDS or Cancer... do we call them healthy and the remaining 10% ill ?

Another sensible person on this thread!? Thank you, good sir!

I must be alone either.

[Bottle]

A less than auspicious beginning to your posting career.

That's a bit talibanesque, but you must admit that a troll thread doesn't deserve 42 pages of responses.

Religion a mental illness?

Seriously? SERIOUSLY????

As I pointed out early in the thread, there's no reason why it has to be a troll topic; there are some fascinating discussions to be had on the subject of belief, superstition, perception, and sanity.

Frankly, what makes it turn "trollish" is people like you, who feel the need to post without contributing anything of substance.

[The Cummunist State]

I thought of something.

If matter cannot be created nor destroyed, (ignoring the religious concept), then my theory for the big explosion would be that it started perhaps as a small star which had a massive nuclear chain reaction then exploded, spreading its debris across the universe whilst over time they transformed into different things, evolving into planets, moons, galaxies, etcetera.

Furthermore what I am also implying is that the universe was compressed in a small highly reactive neutron star or something along those lines before exploding.

Does anyone have thoughts or opinions on this theory?

Another sensible person on this thread!? Thank you, good sir!

I must be alone either.

Technically, the big bang wasn't a explosion, it was a expansion.

[Bottle]

It's not considered a mental illness unless it poses a serious problem to your day-to-day life.

What if it poses a serious problem to the day-to-day life of other people ?

Clinically speaking, that is included.

Something is a disorder if it interferes with the individual's ability to function. The individual can be the one to identify the problem (for instance, a person who reports depression that is making them utterly miserable), but it is also quite possible for other individuals to identify the problem (for instance, relatives who seek help for a loved one who is experiencing paranoid delusions).

Ability to function is the important bit, though. You don't get to report your aunt as being "insane" simply because she believes things you think are stupid or wrong or wacky. And you, yourself, aren't automatically disordered just because you believe something really weird or unusual or outside the mainstream. Indeed, it is not the intensity or type of the belief/feeling/behavior, but rather what impact it has on your ability to do what you gotta do to live.

[Greater Evil Imperial Japanese Dystopia]

I thought of something.

If matter cannot be created nor destroyed, (ignoring the religious concept), then my theory for the big explosion would be that it started perhaps as a small star which had a massive nuclear chain reaction then exploded, spreading its debris across the universe whilst over time they transformed into different things, evolving into planets, moons, galaxies, etcetera.

Furthermore what I am also implying is that the universe was compressed in a small highly reactive neutron star or something along those lines before exploding.

Does anyone have thoughts or opinions on this theory?




I must be alone either.

Technically, the big bang wasn't a explosion, it was a expansion.

Yes, something along those lines. Rather, it seemed to me that it was more of a nuclear chain reaction.

...like a Doomsday machine...

[New Kesheru]

...like a Doomsday machine...

Built under some mountains in Europe?

[The Cummunist State]

Technically, the big bang wasn't a explosion, it was a expansion.

Yes, something along those lines. Rather, it seemed to me that it was more of a nuclear chain reaction.

...like a Doomsday machine...

Well, I'd just reccomend listening to some Stephan Hawkins, Michio Kaku, and good ol' Carl Sagan. However, from what I know, stars didn't exist at that point, so I'm not sure the star thing works out right.

[Evraim]

It's not considered a mental illness unless it poses a serious problem to your day-to-day life.

O RLY?

Mental disorders are generally defined by a combination of how a person feels, acts, thinks or perceives.

"A mental disorder or mental illness is a psychological pattern, potentially reflected in behavior, that is generally associated with distress or disability, and which is not considered part of normal development of a person's culture."

I would say that by any strenuous psychological or psychiatric definition religosity does not constitute a mental illness.

[Greater Evil Imperial Japanese Dystopia]

...like a Doomsday machine...

Built under some mountains in Europe?

A slight possibility.

[Evraim]

Built under some mountains in Europe?

A slight possibility.

I knew Swiss neutrality was only a cover for something evil.

[Jormengand]

I would say that by any strenuous psychological or psychiatric definition religosity does not constitute a mental illness.

Oh? good thing I never said that then.

[New Kesheru]

A slight possibility.

I knew Swiss neutrality was only a cover for something evil.

I got nothing against scientists and such, but you don't need to be one to know that maybe... just maybe... trying to recreate the conditions of the Big Bang is a poorly thoughout out idea. I heard it was really big, and kinda created the universe, but thats what scientists say.