Agnostic.com

10 2

Is devout religious belief a psychiatric disorder?

We would not hesitate to send a teenager let alone a full grown adult who believes in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny to seek professional psychological evaluation and treatment. Why do we give a pass to those who believe without a shred of empirical evidence in an omnipotent Sky Daddy who predates the Universe and has a hand in everything from which team is going to win Friday night's high school football game to the success or failure of the leader of the free world? Is holding a religious belief a bona fide mental disorder?

GareBear517 7 Oct 25
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

10 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

No, just mass delusion. It happens to the best of us. We are sponges when we are young.

0

I'm not a psychologist or anything remotely near it, but I do wonder if the manic religious personality basically needs someone else to do their thinking for them or make the big (or all) decisions. Maybe it's a dread of being a real, honest to goodness thinking reasoning person.

1

It was in the case of my ex. She truly thought the devil was actively trying to make people/ her do bad things and God was the one doing good. I really thought that was NUTS.

1

"Is devout religious belief a psychiatric disorder?"

It depends how devout is 'devout'. I'd say there are probably many devout believers who simply see their religion as the appropriate way to be a good human being which IF it isn't harmful to others probably isn't such a terrible thing & may even be a good thing for some people who need something like that which they don't find in a secular lifestyle (although I think they probably could if they believed they could.) But yes I've seen manic street preachers who's sanity I DO seriously doubt & I wonder whether they'd be like that had religion not made them that way.

"We would not hesitate to send a teenager let alone a full grown adult who believes in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny to seek professional psychological evaluation and treatment."

True but that's because no one seriously suggests there really is a Santa or Fairy or Bunny so we would wouldn't we? The problem with religious claims is they fall into some special category of beliefs which have remained perfectly respectable simply because they always have & society actively recommends these equally crazy beliefs but because they are passed off as "history" people imagine that they are probably true. I thing people like Jesus & Mohammed probably DID exist bit I don't think for a moment that either had supernatural powers but many many people really do which if you think about it is ludicrous but within a culture of ludicrous traditions this is something even sane people get sucked into.

"Why do we give a pass to those who believe without a shred of empirical evidence in an omnipotent Sky Daddy who predates the Universe and has a hand in everything from which team is going to win Friday night's high school football game to the success or failure of the leader of the free world?"

Not everyone perhaps most don't see their god like that & consider football or electoral success as a human choice so I don't think your picture of religious people generally is quite as bonkers as you describe it to be but yes it certainly IS bonkers but it's been around so long people can't see it for what it is anymore.

"Is holding a religious belief a bona fide mental disorder?"

Usually no, not at all because humans are social animals & tend to go with the flow. Doing so often if not usually makes a lot of sense BUT often yes it doesn't but as philosopher Daniel Dennett points out religions are almost 'organisms' in & of themselves & like any organism evolves strategies to protect itself. What religions have evolved are ways to protect themselves from dying out. One of these ways is the taboo against pointing out it's baseless & it's widely considered 'rude' to ask why such a claim ought to believed so by & large people give religions the green light when they should be pointing out that the Emperor has no clothes & of course he hasn't has he? None. We cannot point this fact out too much but we need to remember that doing so too insensitively may well have an equal & opposite effect so an approach like Street Epistemology needs to be employed wherever possible. What is SE? Watch & learn:

Paul Level 5 Oct 28, 2017

Thank you for your very thoughtful response and the informative link. I watched and listened to it for a couple of hours. In many ways I think we are on the same page. In other ways, not. Your first point as to the relative devoutness of an individual is the overwhelmingly most embraced view apparently even among those who participate on this site. Maybe I am an "angry atheist" but I see no difference between moderate or "good" believers and zealots. If anything, it is the moderates who are the most dangerous because they provide the cover and legitimacy that allows the zealots to do their damage. As I am constantly being told here the simple fact that a large majority of people who at least pay lip service to religion in our society make religion somehow acceptable or characteristic and "normal" by sheer weight of their numbers. I cannot accept this. Just because everyone in the asylum is insane doesn't mean insanity is "normal." That reasoning is enough, apparently, to make a distinction possible between the Easter Bunny and Jesus. I don't see it. I know you, personally, do not either. But I am not willing to give those who do a pass just because there are so many of them or that "history" is drenched in their influence. The coach who gathers his team in the locker room to offer a prayer to the almighty creator begging divine intervention in the outcome of the game about to commence is no less delusional or dangerous than the king who rallies his troops and defenders of the cross on to crusades half way across the known world. Both are reinforcing the conventional acceptance of irrational thought in their times. No one thinks they are crazy except the opposing coach who prays to the same god for the same intervention and the devout believers in the same god who talked to a slightly different set of prophets who are about to be invaded.
Because "humans are social animals and go with the flow" is no reason not to swim upstream against the tide. Lemmings go with the flow, too, and what does that get them? I agree with you that the "Emperor has no clothes" and "We cannot point this fact out too much..." but I feel we need to be more militant in our protests than the approach taken in Street Epistemology." Of course, it is best to be diplomatic and reasoned in our denunciation but we need to turn the volume up big time. I sense no ground swell of indignation coming from the non-theist community though I think our numbers are reaching a tipping point. Many people are one conversation away from joining us. I do hear a lot of noise from the religious zealots and they are winning, not because they outnumber us but because they are more strident in their crusade.

2

It's all about the numbers. So many people still believe, and don't outgrow the good lard like most do w/Santa and the Easter Bunny. It's a mental affliction of disordered thinking, and fills the void that should've been filled by scientific knowledge in grade school. Dawkins talks about the 'god of the gaps'; whenever there's a gap in knowledge, people fill it w/ideas of god such as why there's lightning, thunder, the change of seasons, why we have diseases, etc.

That is what irks me the most about religion. Why is it so hard to say, "I don't know," rather than make up stories? That's one thing that never gets taught in schools. We should be humble in our ignorance of the Universe knowing that some questions have been and will be answered by rigorous investigation. The rest is just the wonder of the unknown that spurs us on to further investigation. Where would we be by now if religion had not impeded the way for 3000 years or more to finding real answers?

0

Yes. Going through two marriage counselors all of whom were Christian or religious, Both said my ultra conservative literal Christian ex, did not share the same interpretation of the Bible or Jesus that they did. I think she would be far more comfortable at Westborough Baptist Church as she is a true religious hater. It was clearly a mental disorder in her case.

With most moderate religious folks I think that indoctrination along with the pressure of society to conform, it is just easier to be religious. So lazy, not a mental disorder for moderates.

That must have been hell to live with! I'd love to know how you hooked up with her in the first place. Or did she develop this illness after you were married? Were you already self-identifying as atheist? I assume your ex picked the marriage counselors. If they thought she was off base she must have been a real whacko! On your other point I notice many answers to many questions distinguish between "moderate" or "good" religious people as opposed to zealots. I get it but I don't. The "moderates" provide cover and legitimacy to the zealots and are as big a part of the problem as their more outspoken brethren.

1

Yup. If you consider how passionate devout religious believers are and how many people charged with crimes of passion were declared innocent because their passion allowed them that infinitesimal moment that allowed them to be fucking crazy. I'd call that a pyschiatric disorder for sure.

SamL Level 7 Oct 25, 2017
3

If you classify religious devotion as a disorder, then very few people would be classified as totally "normal." It begs to question what shoudl be seen as "normal" and that has changed over time for all of history. I do think that our society's sense of "normal" shoudl move in a direction where the religiously devout are considered to have a mental disorder, but it is doubtful that will happen anytime soon.

What if human sacrifice was "normal" in a given Society? Would that make it right? It is my opinion that religion causes more damage than the occasional human sacrifice. Should we not fight to abolish it or, at least, sweep it to the margins of Society? (All of which makes me think of those in uniform who give their lives thinking they are "protecting freedom" when what they really are doing is working as henchmen for the corporate plutocracy looting other nations of their resources and spreading cultural imperialism. Perhaps we do practice human sacrifice!)

I am not disagreeing with you. I am just statign the realities of how things are.

Here is one reality, in truth there is no such thing as normal in the workings of a persons phsyce, normal is defined by society, so society defines what is normal. Phsyc class 101

2

agreeing with both commenters... pretty much sums up anything I felt on the topic

3

I agree that religious belief is a form of insanity. Many people are functional, such is the case with many psychological disorders, but many are completely delusional. The definition of psychosis is to accept something that is not real, as being real. We should recognize that a belief in a god falls into the same category as ghosts, the Easter Bunny, talking with Napoleon, or have imaginary friends who are voices in your head.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:2186
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.