Quote:
Originally Posted by crimsontactics
Discussion Thread: : Is religion a mental illness?
Firstly, just a short disclaimer. I'm not trying to insult or degrade any specific racial or religious group or religion as a whole. Just as it's their rights to believe in and promote their chosen divine entitles or beliefs, I feel that it's my rights to be able to believe in my own opinions and to at least share my views. I'm Catholic btw, although I'm starting to doubt my own faith. Is religion a mental illness? What caused me to spawn such a thought? Around a decade back, I paid a visit to IMH with my grandmother to visit another family member who was suffering from dementia. During the visit, I happened to overhear a conversation between two nurses. Although the exact details are no longer clear, I'm certain that they were talking about a new patient who claimed that she had an imaginary friend. I later learned that she was diagnosed with an advanced stage of hallucination, or adulthood paracosm. This is a condition where a person conceive in his mind an imaginary entity and believes that it is actually a part of his environment. This incident had sparked my curiosity about the possible relationship between religion and mental illness. I thought of trying to debate about this issue back in the past, but a series of crackdowns on "racism" back then had instilled enough fear in me to keep my mouth shut. Around two weeks back, I was having a conversation with a friend back in my army camp. Our conversation turned to the topic of religion and my friend, being a staunch atheist, was finding every possible way to demote religion. Out of the blue, he said a sentence which re-sparked my initial curiosity and promoted me to create this thread. The sentence was, " Ben, seriously, what's the difference between a religious person and a mental patient?" Is there a difference? This is a very sensitive question. However, if you were to just close your eyes for a minute, disregard the government's propaganda that racism and religious-discrimination is bad and to just consider this very question, you'll realize that there is actually only one difference. Both believes in imaginary entitles, both thinks that these entitles are a part of the world, be it physical, emotional or spiritual, and both will condemn, or at least view negative, others who do not share their similar imagination. The only difference is that religion is believed by a large group of people while an imaginary friend is only believed by one person, the patient himself. Does an entity or belief exists simply because a large group of people says so? Yes. If a large enough group of people believes in something, it exists due to social pressure. Humans are social creatures. We fear prejudice and shame more than we fear death.... |
"The only difference is that religion is believed by a large group of people while an imaginary friend is only believed by one person, the patient himself."
There is no mention about the veracity (truth) about the belief in question. It could well be possible that a larger truism is experienced by more people as opposed to the "imaginary friend" which is believed by only one.
Unless one has adequate factual evidence against the falsity of mainstream religions, (i.e. have adequate evidence to disprove religion [wiki] (of which there are many brands/ varieties))
It is thus difficult (and thus unwise) to criticize religion in so far that it remains a personal belief and in so far that one does not have the adequate faculties to prove the presence or absence of God.
Your explanation is thus suffers a fallacy of Reductio ad absurdum and perhaps being a straw man argument capitalizing upon the scientific unprovability of religion to disprove religion.
"Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." Albert Einstein, (attributed); US (German-born) physicist (1879 - 1955)
Science [wiki: 'scientific method'] is in any case a creation of man, so despite science's widespread usefulness, still wouldn't it be presumptuous for mankind to apply science to prove or disprove God (or other belief in celestial systems/ powers)- which by definition is the creator of man?- likewise, a photograph CANNOT create a man.
Many formal religions are backed by repositories of history if not documentation as well as re-current archeological re-confirmations- and it is upon this established and scholarly backbone that a religious belief is shared by many (the really faithful that is, excepting the free loaders who misuse religious text as a tool of manipulation over the ignorant and the impoverished).
This does not to diminish the issue of 'Mental illness', defined as "(Medicine / Pathology) any of various disorders in which a person's thoughts, emotions, or behaviour are so abnormal as to cause suffering to himself, herself, or other people" [free dict] wherein the misrepresentation of religion- to create unnecessary stress and inter-religious animosity- remains a significant issue.
It is thus important for the faithful to adopt a discerning if not scholarly stance in the practice of their respective religions, with no lack of diplomacy, so that the truth (God's grace) may be amply revealed to the most in the best possible way; thus avoiding much needless conflict as reflected in '"The Blind Men and the Elephant" by John G. Saxe (poetry reading)'- the source of much sorrow and bloodshed, still manifestly present in the world today.
'"The Blind Men and the Elephant" by John G. Saxe (poetry reading)'
=======
At:
28May2012: Is religion a mental illness?
No comments:
Post a Comment