this thread is a gold mine for ill- or un-defined terms.
Religious belief...a mental illness?
- Thread starter answers
- Start date
this thread is a gold mine for ill- or un-defined terms.
Actually it was like that in Russia during the communist era. Anyone who was overtly (or suspected) of being religious could easily find themselves in a mental institution or prison.
http://www.hkussr.com/saltedbread.htm
.... needless to say, its not the type of reading most people would get goosebumps of ecstasy from ....
regardless, i think "answers" (ironic?) needs to consult a good dictionary and encyclopedia before proceeding any further:
-- o.b.e.s. are neurological phenomena, not signs of mental illness.
-- autism is, uh, hardly the same as mental retardation (wow. answers kinda reminds me of a cop who beat the shit out of me--only he thought epilepsy was "some kind a retardation.")
-- delusions alone do not make one mentally ill, lest we all be mentally ill.
-- "society" does not define the criterion for mental illness.
i could go on, but how about just talking some sense before proceeding any further.
-- o.b.e.s. are neurological phenomena, not signs of mental illness.
-- autism is, uh, hardly the same as mental retardation (wow. answers kinda reminds me of a cop who beat the shit out of me--only he thought epilepsy was "some kind a retardation.")
-- delusions alone do not make one mentally ill, lest we all be mentally ill.
-- "society" does not define the criterion for mental illness.
i could go on, but how about just talking some sense before proceeding any further.
I believe such an evil will be forced within government laws, but will not not
be, for natural reasons, adhered to by the majority of the populace. Some will be defiant, others will hide their belief.
I believe the powers will create a propoganda situation where the believers in
God are made to look dangerous to "normal" society, and, commit genocide.
This will act as an example to those who have ideas of 'coming out'.
jan.
First of all, you are late. Freud and official psychology have long ago declared religiousness to be a kind of mental illness or insanity.
Secondly, being healthy by the norms of a sick society is no health at all.
I fail to see how any conception of fitness can include an element of belief in the non-existent:
I fail to see how any conception of human fitness can include an element of belief that humans are omniscient.
A factor never understood by the actor.
Democracy isn’t found in biblical prophecy.
It’s a wildcard prophets always disregard.
Most of the world is religious, not atheists. Although many religions are opposed to each other. the existence of a god (even a higher power) is more universally excepted than the idea of no god.
I think it will be more like how Paganism is treated in the age of Abrahamic religions. It has been feeding these religions with symbols, rituals, and stories, and today the modern appearances of paganism are mostly seen as eccentricity rather than mental illness. This treatment, of course, depends on how strong the role a monotheistic religion plays in a society, and how weak an alternative paganism is.
Just look at how a pagan symbol, pentagram, is treated throughout the centuries until it is given its current meaning of evil and madness. Its status as an evil symbol is not based on its relation to paganism any more. It is given a role within the belief system just like a Christmas tree. It is evil within the system, not as an alternative:
"The pentagram is used as a Christian symbol for the five senses, and if the letters S, A, L, V, and S are inscribed in the points, it can be taken as a symbol of health (from Latin salus).
Medieval Christians believed it to symbolise the five wounds of Christ. The pentagram was believed to protect against witches and demons.
The pentagram figured in a heavily symbolic Arthurian romance: it appears on the shield of Sir Gawain in the 14th century poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. As the poet explains, the five points of the star each have five meanings: they represent the five senses, the five fingers, the five wounds of Christ, the five joys that Mary had of Jesus (the Annunciation, the Nativity, the Resurrection, the Ascension, and the Assumption), and the five virtues of knighthood which Gawain hopes to embody: noble generosity, fellowship, purity, courtesy, and compassion.
Most Christians, probably due to their misinterpretation of symbols used by ceremonial magicians, came to associate it with Satanism and subsequently rejected the symbol sometime in the twentieth century"(1).
Medieval Christians believed it to symbolise the five wounds of Christ. The pentagram was believed to protect against witches and demons.
The pentagram figured in a heavily symbolic Arthurian romance: it appears on the shield of Sir Gawain in the 14th century poem Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. As the poet explains, the five points of the star each have five meanings: they represent the five senses, the five fingers, the five wounds of Christ, the five joys that Mary had of Jesus (the Annunciation, the Nativity, the Resurrection, the Ascension, and the Assumption), and the five virtues of knighthood which Gawain hopes to embody: noble generosity, fellowship, purity, courtesy, and compassion.
Most Christians, probably due to their misinterpretation of symbols used by ceremonial magicians, came to associate it with Satanism and subsequently rejected the symbol sometime in the twentieth century"(1).
I don't even think religious believes in the future will be treated as harshly as paganism(s) were treated by the new religions. While the paganism was seen as a rival belief system against the dominant monotheistic belief of its time, I believe the religious believes will not be rivalling a new alternative. The disappearance of religions will probably coincide with the scientific knowledge rather than a new belief.
(1)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagram
Last edited:
that's not really a definition of mental illness.
and might i point out, that many of the "rational norms" of our society are completely insane.
do you know what i think is crazy? doing the same wrong things over and over and over and over, and pretending like the effects of which are not happening and not accumulating. that's crazy.
abusing people is crazy.
hating people is crazy.
elitism is crazy.
racial and sexual discrimination is crazy.
using people is crazy.
greed is crazy.
destroying the environment to make money is crazy.
these are all very well ingrained "rational social norms".
Like logic?
??
Logic exists; demonstrably.
I don't recall mentioning any rational basis...
*************
M*W: *************
M*W: There are some 155 articles published in PubMed describing mental illness (predominantly schizophrenia) based on religious beliefs. Here are a few:
The relationship between schizophrenia and religion and its implications for care. Mohr S, Huguelet P. Swiss Med Wkly. 2004 Jun 26;134(25-26):369-76.
Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Département de Psychiatrie, Genève.
This paper focuses on the relationships between schizophrenia and religion, on the basis of a review of literature and the data of an ongoing study about religiousness and spiritual coping conducted among outpatients with chronic schizophrenia. Religion (including both spirituality and religiousness) is salient in the lives of many people suffering from schizophrenia. However, psychiatric research rarely addresses religious issues. Religious beliefs and religious delusions lie on a continuum and vary across cultures. In Switzerland for example, the belief in demons as the cause of mental health problems is a common phenomenon in Christians with high saliency of religiousness. Religion has an impact, not always positive, on the comorbidity of substance abuse and suicidal attempts in schizophrenia. In many patients' life stories, religion plays a central role in the processes of reconstructing a sense of self and recovery. However religion may become part of the problem as well as part of the recovery. Some patients are helped by their faith community, uplifted by spiritual activities, comforted and strengthened by their beliefs. Other patients are rejected by their faith community, burdened by spiritual activities, disappointed and demoralized by their beliefs. Religion is relevant for the treatment of people with schizophrenia in that it may help to reduce pathology, to enhance coping and to foster recovery. In the treatment of these patients, it appears useful to tolerate diversity, to respect others beliefs, to ban proselytism and to have a good knowledge of one's own spiritual identity.
PMID: 15340880 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
*******
Spirituality and religious practices among outpatients with schizophrenia and their clinicians. Huguelet P, Mohr S, Borras L, Gillieron C, Brandt PY. Psychiatr Serv. 2006 Mar;57(3):366-72.
Department of Psychiatry, University Hospitals of Geneva, Rue du 31-Décembre 36, 1207, Geneva, Switzerland. philippe.huguelet@hcuge.ch
OBJECTIVES: Religious issues may be neglected by clinicians who are treating psychotic patients, even when religion constitutes an important means of coping. This study examined the spirituality and religious practices of outpatients with schizophrenia compared with their clinicians. Clinicians' knowledge of patients' religious involvement and spirituality was investigated. METHODS: The study sample included 100 patients of public psychiatric outpatient facilities in Geneva, Switzerland, with a diagnosis of nonaffective psychosis. Audiotaped interviews were conducted with use of a semistructured interview about spirituality and religious coping. The patients' clinicians (N=34) were asked about their own beliefs and religious activities as well as their patients' religious and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Sixteen patients (16 percent) had positive psychotic symptoms reflecting aspects of their religious beliefs. A majority of the patients reported that religion was an important aspect of their lives, but only 36 percent of them had raised this issue with their clinicians. Fewer clinicians were religiously involved, and, in half the cases, their perceptions of patients' religious involvement were inaccurate. A few patients considered religious practice to be incompatible with treatment, and clinicians were seldom aware of such a conflict. CONCLUSIONS: Religion is an important issue for patients with schizophrenia, and it is often not related to the content of their delusions. Clinicians were commonly not aware of their patients' religious involvement, even if they reported feeling comfortable with such an issue.
PMID: 16524995 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
**********
Religiosity and schizophrenia. Aukst-Margetić B, Jakovljević M. Psychiatr Danub. 2008 Sep;20(3):437-8.
Neuropsychiatric hospital "Dr. Ivan Barbot" Popovaca, Croatia. branka.aukst-margetic@zg.t-com.hr
We focus on the relationships between schizophrenia and religiosity, on the basis of the review of literature and the data of an ongoing study about religiousness and personality, and religious coping conducted among outpatients with schizophrenia. Religion may be part of the psychopathology, but some of its dimensions may be protective from the negative effects of the illness. Religion may be relevant for the treatment of people with schizophrenia in that it may help to reduce pathology, to enhance coping and to foster recovery. Religiosity is multidimensional concept and so it must be evaluated in the people with schizophrenia (Aukst-Margetic et al. 2005).
PMID: 18827779 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
**********
The messiah-complex in schizophrenia. Goldwert M. School of Humanities, New York Institute of Technology, NY 10023. Psychol Rep. 1993 Aug;73(1):331-5.
After suggesting that religio-egocentricity and the messiah-complex may be a universal pattern in the psychoses, this paper briefly addresses three questions. First, in general, what is the relationship between religious emotions and schizophrenia? Second, why is it that the messiah-complex surfaces so often in the psychoses? Finally, what is the healthy dimension of religiosity?
PMID: 8367574 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
**********
Religious delusions: finding meanings in psychosis. Bhavsar V, Bhugra D.
GKT School of Medicine, King's College, London, UK. Psychopathology. 2008;41(3):165-72. Epub 2008 Feb 11.
BACKGROUND: Religious delusions have been reported with varying prevalence from cultures around the world. Their contents, context and significance vary according to cultural and economic mores. In this review we discuss the potential relationship between religious delusions and aspects of culture, in particular religious symbols. We suggest that religious rituals and expectations of the family play a major role in the genesis and maintenance of delusions. We consider the roles of religious signifiers in the formation and maintenance of these important phenomena. SAMPLING AND METHODS: Evidence relating to the clinical significance of religious delusions is reviewed. The real clinical significance of religious delusions varies from violence to others to self-harm. The implications of these issues are discussed in relation to their management. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: It is argued that there should be a reassessment of the importance of religious delusions in the light of new ethnographic and clinical evidence.
M*W: *************
M*W: There are some 155 articles published in PubMed describing mental illness (predominantly schizophrenia) based on religious beliefs. Here are a few:
The relationship between schizophrenia and religion and its implications for care. Mohr S, Huguelet P. Swiss Med Wkly. 2004 Jun 26;134(25-26):369-76.
Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Département de Psychiatrie, Genève.
This paper focuses on the relationships between schizophrenia and religion, on the basis of a review of literature and the data of an ongoing study about religiousness and spiritual coping conducted among outpatients with chronic schizophrenia. Religion (including both spirituality and religiousness) is salient in the lives of many people suffering from schizophrenia. However, psychiatric research rarely addresses religious issues. Religious beliefs and religious delusions lie on a continuum and vary across cultures. In Switzerland for example, the belief in demons as the cause of mental health problems is a common phenomenon in Christians with high saliency of religiousness. Religion has an impact, not always positive, on the comorbidity of substance abuse and suicidal attempts in schizophrenia. In many patients' life stories, religion plays a central role in the processes of reconstructing a sense of self and recovery. However religion may become part of the problem as well as part of the recovery. Some patients are helped by their faith community, uplifted by spiritual activities, comforted and strengthened by their beliefs. Other patients are rejected by their faith community, burdened by spiritual activities, disappointed and demoralized by their beliefs. Religion is relevant for the treatment of people with schizophrenia in that it may help to reduce pathology, to enhance coping and to foster recovery. In the treatment of these patients, it appears useful to tolerate diversity, to respect others beliefs, to ban proselytism and to have a good knowledge of one's own spiritual identity.
PMID: 15340880 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
*******
Spirituality and religious practices among outpatients with schizophrenia and their clinicians. Huguelet P, Mohr S, Borras L, Gillieron C, Brandt PY. Psychiatr Serv. 2006 Mar;57(3):366-72.
Department of Psychiatry, University Hospitals of Geneva, Rue du 31-Décembre 36, 1207, Geneva, Switzerland. philippe.huguelet@hcuge.ch
OBJECTIVES: Religious issues may be neglected by clinicians who are treating psychotic patients, even when religion constitutes an important means of coping. This study examined the spirituality and religious practices of outpatients with schizophrenia compared with their clinicians. Clinicians' knowledge of patients' religious involvement and spirituality was investigated. METHODS: The study sample included 100 patients of public psychiatric outpatient facilities in Geneva, Switzerland, with a diagnosis of nonaffective psychosis. Audiotaped interviews were conducted with use of a semistructured interview about spirituality and religious coping. The patients' clinicians (N=34) were asked about their own beliefs and religious activities as well as their patients' religious and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Sixteen patients (16 percent) had positive psychotic symptoms reflecting aspects of their religious beliefs. A majority of the patients reported that religion was an important aspect of their lives, but only 36 percent of them had raised this issue with their clinicians. Fewer clinicians were religiously involved, and, in half the cases, their perceptions of patients' religious involvement were inaccurate. A few patients considered religious practice to be incompatible with treatment, and clinicians were seldom aware of such a conflict. CONCLUSIONS: Religion is an important issue for patients with schizophrenia, and it is often not related to the content of their delusions. Clinicians were commonly not aware of their patients' religious involvement, even if they reported feeling comfortable with such an issue.
PMID: 16524995 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
**********
Religiosity and schizophrenia. Aukst-Margetić B, Jakovljević M. Psychiatr Danub. 2008 Sep;20(3):437-8.
Neuropsychiatric hospital "Dr. Ivan Barbot" Popovaca, Croatia. branka.aukst-margetic@zg.t-com.hr
We focus on the relationships between schizophrenia and religiosity, on the basis of the review of literature and the data of an ongoing study about religiousness and personality, and religious coping conducted among outpatients with schizophrenia. Religion may be part of the psychopathology, but some of its dimensions may be protective from the negative effects of the illness. Religion may be relevant for the treatment of people with schizophrenia in that it may help to reduce pathology, to enhance coping and to foster recovery. Religiosity is multidimensional concept and so it must be evaluated in the people with schizophrenia (Aukst-Margetic et al. 2005).
PMID: 18827779 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
**********
The messiah-complex in schizophrenia. Goldwert M. School of Humanities, New York Institute of Technology, NY 10023. Psychol Rep. 1993 Aug;73(1):331-5.
After suggesting that religio-egocentricity and the messiah-complex may be a universal pattern in the psychoses, this paper briefly addresses three questions. First, in general, what is the relationship between religious emotions and schizophrenia? Second, why is it that the messiah-complex surfaces so often in the psychoses? Finally, what is the healthy dimension of religiosity?
PMID: 8367574 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
**********
Religious delusions: finding meanings in psychosis. Bhavsar V, Bhugra D.
GKT School of Medicine, King's College, London, UK. Psychopathology. 2008;41(3):165-72. Epub 2008 Feb 11.
BACKGROUND: Religious delusions have been reported with varying prevalence from cultures around the world. Their contents, context and significance vary according to cultural and economic mores. In this review we discuss the potential relationship between religious delusions and aspects of culture, in particular religious symbols. We suggest that religious rituals and expectations of the family play a major role in the genesis and maintenance of delusions. We consider the roles of religious signifiers in the formation and maintenance of these important phenomena. SAMPLING AND METHODS: Evidence relating to the clinical significance of religious delusions is reviewed. The real clinical significance of religious delusions varies from violence to others to self-harm. The implications of these issues are discussed in relation to their management. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: It is argued that there should be a reassessment of the importance of religious delusions in the light of new ethnographic and clinical evidence.
what you are asking for Answers is an end to restraint..a world where anyone can do anything they want without having to answer to anybody or anything..anarchy so to speak..lets make everything illegal that imposes constraint on us..and if we can't make it illegal then lets call them crazy..devalue ANY system that creates a personal sense of responsibility..
what lori states is what the results would be to 'get rid' of god..
also..
if i were not a believer, the sentiments about god here of this board would just push me towards believing in god as the majority of posts are from ppl who are god haters, and i do not want to be a part of a 'hate' group.
if god doesn't exist..why are you trying so hard to devalue him?
why is it so important to you that we (believers) be cast in a negative light?
i don't see anyone calling those who believe in santa clause delusional or mentaly inferior..
could it be that the delusion is not on the part of the believer,but on the part of the non-believer?
we keep telling you were to look, but you keep refusing to see him..you keep trying to pass him off as something else..
i have met lots of ppl who do not believe in god and non of them are anti-god..to those who post here speaking against god i call you for what you are..
ANTICHRIST!
may you live long in hell.
i also do not understand why this forum allows such threads as it clearly violates the rules set forth in the stcky post
ex;
3. Stereotyping and name-calling
Be careful of assigning character features to another poster because of his or her membership of a group (such as a particular religious belief system). It is acceptable to point out similarities between members of groups, but only as long as this is backed up by some kind of argument or evidence. Posts which resort to name-calling will be edited or deleted. Unacceptable posts include:
• Religious people like you are nothing more than blind followers of authority.
• All Jews want to rid the world of the Palestinian people.
• Muslims (like you) are mindless fools who don't believe in the real God.
4. Goading, flaming and trolling
Posts which, in the moderator's opinion, serve no purpose other than to attempt to provoke an angry reaction from another poster, will be deleted.
Blanket statements made about the beliefs and/or characteristics of members of a particular religion, if posted without supporting evidence which is not propaganda (as defined below), may be deleted.
It is not expected that members of one religious group or belief system will be friendly and receptive to contrary beliefs. However, this is not an excuse for the general disparagement of anybody who adheres to a belief system you personally find unpalatable or offensive. Posts that have the agenda of proclaiming one religion as better than another may be deleted.
At the end of the day, this is a science forum and the scientific perspective and the reasoned perspective will generally be the status quo. This doesn’t, however, mean it is acceptable to refer to members who are religious and express their religious opinions as “nutjobs,” “nutters,” nutbars,” or more serious verbiage such as “idiot,” “moron,” etc.
Posts and threads that are purely anti-science may be moderated.
what about anti-religious threads?
don't they qualify for hate mongering?
ex;
3. Stereotyping and name-calling
Be careful of assigning character features to another poster because of his or her membership of a group (such as a particular religious belief system). It is acceptable to point out similarities between members of groups, but only as long as this is backed up by some kind of argument or evidence. Posts which resort to name-calling will be edited or deleted. Unacceptable posts include:
• Religious people like you are nothing more than blind followers of authority.
• All Jews want to rid the world of the Palestinian people.
• Muslims (like you) are mindless fools who don't believe in the real God.
4. Goading, flaming and trolling
Posts which, in the moderator's opinion, serve no purpose other than to attempt to provoke an angry reaction from another poster, will be deleted.
Blanket statements made about the beliefs and/or characteristics of members of a particular religion, if posted without supporting evidence which is not propaganda (as defined below), may be deleted.
It is not expected that members of one religious group or belief system will be friendly and receptive to contrary beliefs. However, this is not an excuse for the general disparagement of anybody who adheres to a belief system you personally find unpalatable or offensive. Posts that have the agenda of proclaiming one religion as better than another may be deleted.
At the end of the day, this is a science forum and the scientific perspective and the reasoned perspective will generally be the status quo. This doesn’t, however, mean it is acceptable to refer to members who are religious and express their religious opinions as “nutjobs,” “nutters,” nutbars,” or more serious verbiage such as “idiot,” “moron,” etc.
Posts and threads that are purely anti-science may be moderated.
what about anti-religious threads?
don't they qualify for hate mongering?
Thanks for bringing santa clause up.
That is the perfect example of why one thing is considered a mental illness and why another isn't.
A child believing in Santa Clause is considered normal within our society, that is why it isn't classed as a mental illness.
As someone mentioned previously, a group of psychiatrists meets and determines what is considered a mental illness based on their views of what is socially normal. These diagnostic criteria are then published in the DSM.
Lori wrote "that's not really a definition of mental illness.
and might i point out, that many of the "rational norms" of our society are completely insane."
Well it is actually a definition of mental illness. One taught at the number one university in Australia. But I like how you point out that many of the rational norms of our society are completely insane. Because it shows that you have no idea what you are talking about. Something cannot be classed as insane if it is a rational norm. You can say it goes against your own personal logic. But the great thing is, what you think doesn't matter.
Lori you go onto say "do you know what i think is crazy?"
You know what, I don't, and I also don't care, because what you think doesn't matter. You do not write the DSM, you are not a psychologist or a psychiatrist, so what you have to say on what should be diagnosed a mental illness means nothing.
Why is it that believers, like yourself, can have no authority at all on a subject, yet tell people that know what they are talking about that they are wrong and then go onto give your own uneducated point of view. Damn Lori that's frustrating.
Parmalee wrote:
"regardless, i think "answers" (ironic?) needs to consult a good dictionary and encyclopedia before proceeding any further:
-- o.b.e.s. are neurological phenomena, not signs of mental illness.
-- autism is, uh, hardly the same as mental retardation (wow. answers kinda reminds me of a cop who beat the shit out of me--only he thought epilepsy was "some kind a retardation.")
-- delusions alone do not make one mentally ill, lest we all be mentally ill.
-- "society" does not define the criterion for mental illness.
i could go on, but how about just talking some sense before proceeding any further. "
Okay what is o.b.e.s? Did I even mention this?
75% of autistic people are mentally retarded. A majority will never learn to speak. So I think your statment that I need to look up a dictionary before saying autistics are an example of mentally retarded people, is pretty damn wrong.
Delusions alone do not make us mentally ill, I agree. However I never said I was giving the full diagnostic criteria for mental illness. Generally a delusion has to have an impact on the persons quality of life or their social functioning before it is classed as a mental illness. If you want a full diagnostic criteria for mental illness read the DSMIV. For the purpose of this post I simply mentioned a general principle of mental illness.
And yes society does define the criteria for mental illness. Homosexuality used to be defined as a mental illness in the older versions of the DSM. Until society changed their views, psychiatrists met and changed the diagnostic criteria in the DSM BASED ON WHAT SOCIETY SAID WAS NORMAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It does not matter what you think about the process of classifying mental illness, whether you think it is right or wrong, because it is simply just the way it is, regardless of what you think.
That is the perfect example of why one thing is considered a mental illness and why another isn't.
A child believing in Santa Clause is considered normal within our society, that is why it isn't classed as a mental illness.
As someone mentioned previously, a group of psychiatrists meets and determines what is considered a mental illness based on their views of what is socially normal. These diagnostic criteria are then published in the DSM.
Lori wrote "that's not really a definition of mental illness.
and might i point out, that many of the "rational norms" of our society are completely insane."
Well it is actually a definition of mental illness. One taught at the number one university in Australia. But I like how you point out that many of the rational norms of our society are completely insane. Because it shows that you have no idea what you are talking about. Something cannot be classed as insane if it is a rational norm. You can say it goes against your own personal logic. But the great thing is, what you think doesn't matter.
Lori you go onto say "do you know what i think is crazy?"
You know what, I don't, and I also don't care, because what you think doesn't matter. You do not write the DSM, you are not a psychologist or a psychiatrist, so what you have to say on what should be diagnosed a mental illness means nothing.
Why is it that believers, like yourself, can have no authority at all on a subject, yet tell people that know what they are talking about that they are wrong and then go onto give your own uneducated point of view. Damn Lori that's frustrating.
Parmalee wrote:
"regardless, i think "answers" (ironic?) needs to consult a good dictionary and encyclopedia before proceeding any further:
-- o.b.e.s. are neurological phenomena, not signs of mental illness.
-- autism is, uh, hardly the same as mental retardation (wow. answers kinda reminds me of a cop who beat the shit out of me--only he thought epilepsy was "some kind a retardation.")
-- delusions alone do not make one mentally ill, lest we all be mentally ill.
-- "society" does not define the criterion for mental illness.
i could go on, but how about just talking some sense before proceeding any further. "
Okay what is o.b.e.s? Did I even mention this?
75% of autistic people are mentally retarded. A majority will never learn to speak. So I think your statment that I need to look up a dictionary before saying autistics are an example of mentally retarded people, is pretty damn wrong.
Delusions alone do not make us mentally ill, I agree. However I never said I was giving the full diagnostic criteria for mental illness. Generally a delusion has to have an impact on the persons quality of life or their social functioning before it is classed as a mental illness. If you want a full diagnostic criteria for mental illness read the DSMIV. For the purpose of this post I simply mentioned a general principle of mental illness.
And yes society does define the criteria for mental illness. Homosexuality used to be defined as a mental illness in the older versions of the DSM. Until society changed their views, psychiatrists met and changed the diagnostic criteria in the DSM BASED ON WHAT SOCIETY SAID WAS NORMAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It does not matter what you think about the process of classifying mental illness, whether you think it is right or wrong, because it is simply just the way it is, regardless of what you think.
I'm just going to post this again to make sure people read it.
Society does define the criteria for mental illness. Homosexuality used to be defined as a mental illness in the older versions of the DSM. Until society changed their views, psychiatrists met and changed the diagnostic criteria in the DSM BASED ON WHAT SOCIETY SAID WAS NORMAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It does not matter what you think about the process of classifying mental illness, whether you think it is right or wrong, because it is simply just the way it is, regardless of what you think.
Society does define the criteria for mental illness. Homosexuality used to be defined as a mental illness in the older versions of the DSM. Until society changed their views, psychiatrists met and changed the diagnostic criteria in the DSM BASED ON WHAT SOCIETY SAID WAS NORMAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It does not matter what you think about the process of classifying mental illness, whether you think it is right or wrong, because it is simply just the way it is, regardless of what you think.
I think they don't. Because without religions, there would still be people. Hating religion and hating believers are not the same thing. It might be argued that religions promote discrimination and therefore promote hatred.
In a similar vein, one might be anti-nationality, and argue the necessity to get rid of all national boundaries. It is difficult to identify this view with hating everybody living inside national boundaries all over the world.
An anti-religion person also lives a life influenced by the religions, and a person has every right to discuss about the factors influencing one's own life.
Also seems like people have misunderstood me. This is a 'what if?' post. I don't actually think Christians are mentally ill. The process of christian belief follows psychological mechanisms. I might start another thread on that.
I do however think that Jesus' followers were schizophrenic, and I believe that if Jesus existed he was also schizophrenic, however I believe that the Jesus of the bible never existed, but someone they called Jesus and followed probably did exist, but he surely didn't do anything they claimed, they were delusional and thought he did.
I've met schizophrenics who talk exactly like Jesus did and claim the exact same types of things. They are 100% convinced that their delusion is true, despite what anyone can say or do to prove them false.
I do however think that Jesus' followers were schizophrenic, and I believe that if Jesus existed he was also schizophrenic, however I believe that the Jesus of the bible never existed, but someone they called Jesus and followed probably did exist, but he surely didn't do anything they claimed, they were delusional and thought he did.
I've met schizophrenics who talk exactly like Jesus did and claim the exact same types of things. They are 100% convinced that their delusion is true, despite what anyone can say or do to prove them false.
pardon, but this is unclear:
1. society defines the criteria for mental illness.
2. YOU are a member of society.
3. YOU, by virtue of being a member of society, play a role in defining the criteria for mental illness.
BUT:
4. it does not matter what YOU think about the process of classifying mental illness
5. it is simply just the way it is.
huh? so which is it: does it matter what YOU think? or is what YOU think of no consequence?