Is Religion A Mental Illness?

[Farnhamia]

You CAN have an absence of belief after considering the issue. I've considered the ancient alien hypothesis, and the aquatic ape hypothesis, and I lack belief in both.

I happen to believe that neither has legitimacy, but I certainly have a belief about them.

And what would that be, pray?

[Evraim]

I happen to believe that neither has legitimacy, but I certainly have a belief about them.

And what would that be, pray?

The belief that neither has legitimacy, as stated previously.

[Farnhamia]

And what would that be, pray?

The belief that neither has legitimacy, as stated previously.

Ah, I see.

[Evraim]

The belief that neither has legitimacy, as stated previously.

Ah, I see.

The point I'm trying to make is that while not having a belief is the default position that once you encounter an idea, theory, or concept you ought to formulate a belief on it and generally most people do. Of course, I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong, but nobody has ever tried to prove that it's rational or even possible to not have a belief after thinking about a subject. Would you be willing to convince me otherwise?

[Anti-Obamaland]

NOt having religion is a mental illness.

[Tlaceceyaya]

Ah, I see.

The point I'm trying to make is that while not having a belief is the default position that once you encounter an idea, theory, or concept you ought to formulate a belief on it and generally most people do. Of course, I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong, but nobody has ever tried to prove that it's rational or even possible to not have a belief after thinking about a subject. Would you be willing to convince me otherwise?

Okay.
You can lack a belief in something. Do you deny that you lack a belief in the giant bonobo 1000000 lightyears away from the edge of the observable universe?

[The Cummunist State]

NOt having religion is a mental illness.

We know your opinion.

[Tlaceceyaya]

NOt having religion is a mental illness.

Didn't you say that already, and in the exact same phrasing, and with no given reason whatsoever?

[Evraim]

The point I'm trying to make is that while not having a belief is the default position that once you encounter an idea, theory, or concept you ought to formulate a belief on it and generally most people do. Of course, I'm open to the possibility that I'm wrong, but nobody has ever tried to prove that it's rational or even possible to not have a belief after thinking about a subject. Would you be willing to convince me otherwise?

Okay.
You can lack a belief in something. Do you deny that you lack a belief in the giant bonobo 1000000 lightyears away from the edge of the observable universe?

I never said you couldn't. I suggested that after thinking about a subject it is practically impossible not to formulate a belief of some kind regarding said subject. Yes, if you add the word "in" after the word "belief". However, you could also say that I do believe that the giant bonobo 1,000,000 lightyears away from the edge of the observable universe does not exist. I do not belief "in" the bonobo, but I have beliefs about the idea of it.

Also, Anti-Obamaland, you're still wrong.

[Tlaceceyaya]

Okay.
You can lack a belief in something. Do you deny that you lack a belief in the giant bonobo 1000000 lightyears away from the edge of the observable universe?

Yes, if you add the word "in" after the word "belief". However, you could also say that I do believe that the giant bonobo 1,000,000 lightyears away from the edge of the observable universe does not exist. I do not belief "in" the bonobo, but I have beliefs about the idea of it.

Also, Anti-Obamaland, you're still wrong.

Yeah, you do not belief in the bonobo. You have A belief that the bonobo does not exist, because of the lack of evidence for it. But that's like saying you have a hobby of not collecting stamps.

[Anti-Obamaland]

I'm correct and you know it. Jesus loves you.

[Evraim]

Yes, if you add the word "in" after the word "belief". However, you could also say that I do believe that the giant bonobo 1,000,000 lightyears away from the edge of the observable universe does not exist. I do not belief "in" the bonobo, but I have beliefs about the idea of it.

Also, Anti-Obamaland, you're still wrong.

Yeah, you do not belief in the bonobo. You have A belief that the bonobo does not exist, because of the lack of evidence for it. But that's like saying you have a hobby of not collecting stamps.

Not really. Technically speaking, believing that something does not exists or is not a certain way still constitutes a belief. The same cannot be said of the hobby example as not performing an action does not necessarily constitute an action in and of itself.

I'm correct and you know it. Jesus loves you.

I know that you're incorrect.

He's a dead rabbi to me...

[Arkinesia]

Yes it is a roughly 50/50 split. But the fact remains. There are bigoted people out there on either side, atleast I know where the bigots who infest my religion are entirely wrong. But in Athiesm it seems accepted, see Christopher Hitchens or Richard Dawkins, and those are "leaders".

And why, pray tell, are they "bigots" ? Both after all offered extensive reasoning, complete with relevant arguments, behind their dislike.
You can certainly disagree with their conclusions - or perhaps even with their reasoning - but bigots ?

If Hitchens and Dawkins had reasonable criticisms, they were lost in the vat of rhetoric the two spewed/continue to spew.

[The Cummunist State]

Yes, if you add the word "in" after the word "belief". However, you could also say that I do believe that the giant bonobo 1,000,000 lightyears away from the edge of the observable universe does not exist. I do not belief "in" the bonobo, but I have beliefs about the idea of it.

Also, Anti-Obamaland, you're still wrong.

Yeah, you do not belief in the bonobo. You have A belief that the bonobo does not exist, because of the lack of evidence for it. But that's like saying you have a hobby of not collecting stamps.

No, no, no, you don't have to believe that something exists or believe that it does not, you can also Not believe either way.

And Anti-obamaland, Jesus doesn't love me because he's DEAD. Get over it.

[Evraim]

And why, pray tell, are they "bigots" ? Both after all offered extensive reasoning, complete with relevant arguments, behind their dislike.
You can certainly disagree with their conclusions - or perhaps even with their reasoning - but bigots ?

If Hitchens and Dawkins had reasonable criticisms, they were lost in the vat of rhetoric the two spewed/continue to spew.

^ This. I enjoyed some of Dawkins work, but "The G-d Delusion" was perfect rot. He also hasn't helped a terrible deal in convincing creationists to accept scientific theories because of said rhetoric.

Yeah, you do not belief in the bonobo. You have A belief that the bonobo does not exist, because of the lack of evidence for it. But that's like saying you have a hobby of not collecting stamps.

No, no, no, you don't have to believe that something exists or believe that it does not, you can also believe that you don't believe either way.

And Anti-obamaland, Jesus doesn't love me because he's DEAD. Get over it.

I acknowledge the truth of your statement. Is that genuinely your position though? I have reason to suspect that a decent majority of people who claim to lack a belief about something actually to possess a belief about said thing. It's all about how you structure the sentence.

[The Cummunist State]

If Hitchens and Dawkins had reasonable criticisms, they were lost in the vat of rhetoric the two spewed/continue to spew.

^ This. I enjoyed some of Dawkins work, but "The G-d Delusion" was perfect rot. He also hasn't helped a terrible deal in convincing creationists to accept scientific theories because of said rhetoric.

Excuse this question, but is your typing of the word god as g-d part of your religion? This isn't meant in a bad way, by the way. I want to know. (It's probably going to be something glaringly obvious that I don't know because I don't study religion.)

EDIT: I do not believe a god exists and I do not believe a god doesn't exist. I'd have a burden of proof if I believed either of those.

[Evraim]

^ This. I enjoyed some of Dawkins work, but "The G-d Delusion" was perfect rot. He also hasn't helped a terrible deal in convincing creationists to accept scientific theories because of said rhetoric.

Excuse this question, but is your typing of the word god as g-d part of your religion? This isn't meant in a bad way, by the way. I want to know. (It's probably going to be something glaringly obvious that I don't know because I don't study religion.)

Oh, don't worry about offending me. I also apologize if I offended you with my earlier remarks, but I am curious about the issue of belief and/or non-belief.

Yes. Some Jews elect to emit that letter when writing G-d in a sentence. I wouldn't expect the majority of people to know about it though. Good guess, by the way!

EDIT: I consider the burden of proof attached to the positive claim. Utilizing empiricism, you are not required to provide proof that something doesn't exist if there isn't proof that it exists.

[The Cummunist State]

Excuse this question, but is your typing of the word god as g-d part of your religion? This isn't meant in a bad way, by the way. I want to know. (It's probably going to be something glaringly obvious that I don't know because I don't study religion.)

Oh, don't worry about offending me. I also apologize if I offended you with my earlier remarks, but I am curious about the issue of belief and/or non-belief.

Yes. Some Jews elect to emit that letter when writing G-d in a sentence. I wouldn't expect the majority of people to know about it though. Good guess, by the way!

Ah. Thanks for clearing that up! And sorry if I offended you too

[Tlaceceyaya]

And why, pray tell, are they "bigots" ? Both after all offered extensive reasoning, complete with relevant arguments, behind their dislike.
You can certainly disagree with their conclusions - or perhaps even with their reasoning - but bigots ?

If Hitchens and Dawkins had reasonable criticisms, they were lost in the vat of rhetoric the two spewed/continue to spew.

The rhetoric is what make Dawkins' books enjoyable. The God Delusion isn't just a book of arguments - it has humour in it. I could provide a lot of examples if I were on my other computer. Have you actually read The God Delusion? It's a good read. It has fact, logic, reason and humorous anecdotes. (Although one is a bit morbid)

[Evraim]

If Hitchens and Dawkins had reasonable criticisms, they were lost in the vat of rhetoric the two spewed/continue to spew.

The rhetoric is what make Dawkins' books enjoyable. The God Delusion isn't just a book of arguments - it has humour in it. I could provide a lot of examples if I were on my other computer. Have you actually read The God Delusion? It's a good read. It has fact, logic, reason and humorous anecdotes. (Although one is a bit morbid)

I shall henceforth read everything you post with Dawkin's voice in my head. I consider his voice pleasant at least...

[Tlaceceyaya]

The rhetoric is what make Dawkins' books enjoyable. The God Delusion isn't just a book of arguments - it has humour in it. I could provide a lot of examples if I were on my other computer. Have you actually read The God Delusion? It's a good read. It has fact, logic, reason and humorous anecdotes. (Although one is a bit morbid)

I shall henceforth read everything you post with Dawkin's voice in my head. I consider his voice pleasant at least...

I was shocked when I first heard his voice. I read The God Delusion before watching one of his documentaries, and I imagined him with a deeper voice.

[New Kesheru]

I really just don't see how me sitting in church, giving some prayers, and then going about my day makes me mentally ill. The OPs accusations seem baseless, is he one of those neo-athiest cult people? One of the people who if Dawkins told him to jump off a cliff he would do it. Cause if we want to talk about being crazy, well blind faith in anything is crazy.

[Evraim]

I really just don't see how me sitting in church, giving some prayers, and then going about my day makes me mentally ill. The OPs accusations seem baseless, is he one of those neo-athiest cult people? One of the people who if Dawkins told him to jump off a cliff he would do it. Cause if we want to talk about being crazy, well blind faith in anything is crazy.

Richard Dawkins is probably as irritated by his cultists as you are considering his stated goals are to encourage people to think for themselves and accept supported scientific theories. However, the original posters assertions do lack legitimacy as far as I have seen.

I shall henceforth read everything you post with Dawkin's voice in my head. I consider his voice pleasant at least...

I was shocked when I first heard his voice. I read The God Delusion before watching one of his documentaries, and I imagined him with a deeper voice.

I actually wasn't terribly surprised. Although I dislike some of his more vitriolic criticisms of religion, I do believe it would enjoy conversing with him about evolutionary biology or science in general.

[Demen 2]

no butt ATHIESM is

"Ron Paul 2012, Athiesm"


You must be new here.


Anywho, no. it is a mindset. A faith.

[Demen 2]

I really just don't see how me sitting in church, giving some prayers, and then going about my day makes me mentally ill. The OPs accusations seem baseless, is he one of those neo-athiest cult people? One of the people who if Dawkins told him to jump off a cliff he would do it. Cause if we want to talk about being crazy, well blind faith in anything is crazy.

if the pope told every catholic that god told him to tell them to jump off a cliff, I have a feeling that there would be a rapid decrease in the catholic religion.


Just saying.