Is Religion REALLY a Mental Illness ?

[Paranoid Android]

Back in the day, before people knew about mental illness, they often blamed it on demons, spirits et cetra. Therefore, I contend that religion IS a form of mental illness. Yes, it was a POSITIVE form of mental illness, but it was mental illness all the same.
We are often taught to address mental illness as negative.I don't believe that. I believe that mental illness has given humanity a lot of things. If you are schizophrenic, then it would be easy before there was medicine or knowledge of it, to portray what you saw as visions given by God. Some people might think that is true, but personally, I don't. I believe they were visions given by God and meant for people to understand.
I think that Squares have tried to pass it off as if it is something they created. In my opinion, it wasn't and we have to thank people with mental illness for having those visions and relating them to us.
Do you believe this is true ? Or do you view ALL mental illness as being negative ? Do you acknowledge that it was thanks to the gifts these people possessed that we have the institutions and scriptures we have today ?

 

[Quintessence]

You know, there was an article on Patheos about this recently that calls this notion out for the steaming pile of $#@% pucky that it is.

Why You Sound Ridiculous Claiming Religiosity is a Mental Defect

"To sum up aggregated scholarly opinion: (1) There’s zero evidence showing religious belief is the result of mental defect or a mental illness. (2) Religiosity stems from naturally-occurring, intuitive cognitive systems."​

 

[Paranoid Android]

You know, there was an article on Patheos about this recently that calls this notion out for the steaming pile of $#@% pucky that it is.

Why You Sound Ridiculous Claiming Religiosity is a Mental Defect

"To sum up aggregated scholarly opinion: (1) There’s zero evidence showing religious belief is the result of mental defect or a mental illness. (2) Religiosity stems from naturally-occurring, intuitive cognitive systems."​

I disagree. It clearly came from wonderful, gifted mentally ill people.

 

[Quintessence]

I disagree. It clearly came from wonderful, gifted mentally ill people.

Well, you're certainly free to disagree with aggregated scholarly opinion that holds substantially more weight than your own. Or mine, for that matter.

 

[Paranoid Android]

Well, you're certainly free to disagree with aggregated scholarly opinion that holds substantially more weight than your own. Or mine, for that matter.

How do you explain they saw things ? How did they do that ? I think that Squares want to take the CREDIT for religion without thanking us. It's typical that they always blame us.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

Back in the day, before people knew about mental illness, they often blamed it on demons, spirits et cetra. Therefore, I contend that religion IS a form of mental illness.

So, you wish to adopt a position on mental illness justified by appeal to the medical expertise of superstitious ignorance of antiquity, the middle ages, etc.? "Before people knew about mental illness, they treated people appealed to religious notion. Therefore [i.e., using this logic] I contend we should do the same type of thing". Great.

Yes, it was a POSITIVE form of mental illness, but it was mental illness all the same.

I've had the DSM-IV TR for years, the ICD-10 for a while, and the DSM-V since it came out. I don't recall "religion" being in any of these or any other diagnostic manuals.

We are often taught to address mental illness as negative.

That's because illnesses are negative. However unscientific Freudian nonsense was, the basic idea behind separating pathology from just experiencing human emotions, reactions, etc., remains sound enough. Going through diagnostic manuals, one can diagnose themselves with practically anything. Freud simplified (overly, of course, but it remains apt) the central distinction between clinical distress and the normal ups and downs of life to one's ability to "love and work". Basically, if you find that you can't do the things you were able to do, or get no satisfaction or happiness that which you used to, or can't function in society because e.g., you can't adequately separate hallucinations (visual and/or another modality), etc., then this is "negative".

Put simply, a central factor in distinguishing mental illness for normal human experience is negative effects. This is true even when it comes to would-be psychotic "symptoms" (in certain cultures, hearing the voices of recently deceased loved ones is not a clinical symptom but a social norm).

to portray what you saw as visions given by God.

Same with the use of substances, various methods used by Shamans (not in the limited Siberian sense but as the term is used more generally) to induce ecstatic states using everything from meditation to pain (e.g., hanging from hooks buried in their flesh), epileptic and similar neurological disorders, and normal human experiences given the right contexts. Before Sybil, the number of cases of multiple personality disorder was practically nil. Thanks to a combination of the recovered memory movement and some popular media accounts of a (as it turned out later, untruthful) case study in particular, the number of cases boomed. A small number of mental health professionals were responsible for an extremely high number of diagnosed cased. One of the main reasons for this, it turned out, is that the methods used to determine whether or not patients had "alters" actually tended to create them, along with false memories, in people, particularly those more prone to suggestion. As another example, consider the Stanford prison experiment. A bunch of participants sign up for a study, are divided into "prisoners" and "guards" at random, the prison is a floor in Stanford with some additional trimmings for dramatic effect, and in a surprisingly fast time the prisoners were planning a revolt and suffering from a variety of symptoms (cognitive, emotional, physical) typical of actual incardination, the guards meanwhile began to turn into militant, power-hungry sadists. Finally, the PI heading the study stopped it because his research assistant (later wife) told him it was out of control and beyond dangerous.

Some people might think that is true, but personally, I don't. I believe they were visions given by God and meant for people to understand.

You're talking about a VERY select type of extremely small symptom manifestations among a small subset of those diagnosed with mental illness whilst ignoring how many individuals can have these same symptom manifestations due to other factors.

Do you acknowledge that it was thanks to the gifts these people possessed that we have the institutions and scriptures we have today ?

No, I think its patently ridiculous. Possessed people weren't believe to be speaking for god, and even those who were thought blessed because of glossolalia couldn't possibly be responsible for scriptures because, well, they weren't speaking any language.

 

[Paranoid Android]

So, you wish to adopt a position on mental illness justified by appeal to the medical expertise of superstitious ignorance of antiquity, the middle ages, etc.? "Before people knew about mental illness, they treated people appealed to religious notion. Therefore [i.e., using this logic] I contend we should do the same type of thing". Great.


I've had the DSM-IV TR for years, the ICD-10 for a while, and the DSM-V since it came out. I don't recall "religion" being in any of these or any other diagnostic manuals.

That's because illnesses are negative. However unscientific Freudian nonsense was, the basic idea behind separating pathology from just experiencing human emotions, reactions, etc., remains sound enough. Going through diagnostic manuals, one can diagnose themselves with practically anything. Freud simplified (overly, of course, but it remains apt) the central distinction between clinical distress and the normal ups and downs of life to one's ability to "love and work". Basically, if you find that you can't do the things you were able to do, or get no satisfaction or happiness that which you used to, or can't function in society because e.g., you can't adequately separate hallucinations (visual and/or another modality), etc., then this is "negative".

Put simply, a central factor in distinguishing mental illness for normal human experience is negative effects. This is true even when it comes to would-be psychotic "symptoms" (in certain cultures, hearing the voices of recently deceased loved ones is not a clinical symptom but a social norm). That is interesting. I have certain mental disabilities. But hey, that doesn't mean I can't think. Actually, "disability" is not "DIS" ABILITY, it just is that you people tend to concentrate all your attention o n the "disability" part. Here is a trick question: Do you know any FAMOUS disabled people ?



Same with the use of substances, various methods used by Shamans (not in the limited Siberian sense but as the term is used more generally) to induce ecstatic states using everything from meditation to pain (e.g., hanging from hooks buried in their flesh), epileptic and similar neurological disorders, and normal human experiences given the right contexts. Before Sybil, the number of cases of multiple personality disorder was practically nil. Thanks to a combination of the recovered memory movement and some popular media accounts of a (as it turned out later, untruthful) case study in particular, the number of cases boomed. A small number of mental health professionals were responsible for an extremely high number of diagnosed cased. One of the main reasons for this, it turned out, is that the methods used to determine whether or not patients had "alters" actually tended to create them, along with false memories, in people, particularly those more prone to suggestion. As another example, consider the Stanford prison experiment. A bunch of participants sign up for a study, are divided into "prisoners" and "guards" at random, the prison is a floor in Stanford with some additional trimmings for dramatic effect, and in a surprisingly fast time the prisoners were planning a revolt and suffering from a variety of symptoms (cognitive, emotional, physical) typical of actual incardination, the guards meanwhile began to turn into militant, power-hungry sadists. Finally, the PI heading the study stopped it because his research assistant (later wife) told him it was out of control and beyond dangerous.


You're talking about a VERY select type of extremely small symptom manifestations among a small subset of those diagnosed with mental illness whilst ignoring how many individuals can have these same symptom manifestations due to other factors. I KNOW that people don't, normally, have visions. Now some people could use shamanic techniques but that's not a good explanation of why people have visions. However, SCHIZOPHRENIA is.


No, I think its patently ridiculous. Possessed people weren't believe to be speaking for god, and even those who were thought blessed because of glossolalia couldn't possibly be responsible for scriptures because, well, they weren't speaking any language.

What ? A person, as I conceive it, had a vision. People found it useful and made it easier for people to understand. Because they were though to be possessed by a god or powerful spirits. Also, I think they deserve a lot of credit for having such a unique talent.

 

[arthra]

I contend that religion IS a form of mental illness.... we have to thank people with mental illness for having those visions and relating them to us.
Do you believe this is true ? Or do you view ALL mental illness as being negative ? Do you acknowledge that it was thanks to the gifts these people possessed that we have the institutions and scriptures we have today ?

Paranoid Android,

I think the first part of your post was probably correct.. Centuries ago people blamed demons for various conditions people have anyway that we treat today as mental illness or perhaps epilepsy, etc.

The later part of your post is problematic as you seem to interpret spiritual experiences as mental illness... In my view you need to examine the lives of people who led lives of devotion and dedication... not because they were mentally ill but because they had spiritual insight. A person with spiritual insight is well organized and achieves goals...spiritual goals. Their minds are clear and they have long term relationships with other people around them. They show compassion to humanity and teach people a higher more principled way of life.

I'd suggest reading a classic on the subject of mysticism and spiritual experience:

• Mysticism: A Study of the Nature and Development of Man's Spiritual Consciousness (1911). Twelfth edition published by E.P. Dutton in 1930. Republished by Dover Publications in 2002 (ISBN 978-0-486-42238-1). See also online editions at Christian Classics Ethereal Library and at Wikisource.

 

[Jumi]

I'm atheist and I still find the OP offensive. Regardless of whether mental illness can lead to something positive, it's not an accurate description.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

What ? A person, as I conceive it, had a vision.

What was this person's name? More seriously, how is this remotely related to religion or mental health? First, mental disorders are hardly the only causes of visual hallucinations. Second, visions aren't at the root of religious traditions. Third, I've spent a fair amount of time with people suffering from psychotic disorders and while I can say that I have met two individuals who thought themselves to be Jesus (one also was the Buddha) and some other spiritual/religious related delusions (I remember being asked by a patient for whom medication worked so well he had never appeared to have a psychotic disorder whether or not he was interfering with my connection to the divine). But all of the people I've seen who have visual hallucinations have seen things like snakes in the air they need to pull down and stomp on, something they yell at that isn't there, and most frequently things they barely say anything about but which you can tell when they are seeing them because they smile, laugh softly, groan, or become agitated while their eyes more around very fast as if there were an wasp or something they were watching. More frequent are auditory hallucinations.

But they don't hear god talking anymore than anybody I've met has seen angels or god(s) or whatever.

Also, I think they deserve a lot of credit for having such a unique talent.

Wow.

 

[Laika]

Back in the day, before people knew about mental illness, they often blamed it on demons, spirits et cetra. Therefore, I contend that religion IS a form of mental illness. Yes, it was a POSITIVE form of mental illness, but it was mental illness all the same.
We are often taught to address mental illness as negative.I don't believe that. I believe that mental illness has given humanity a lot of things. If you are schizophrenic, then it would be easy before there was medicine or knowledge of it, to portray what you saw as visions given by God. Some people might think that is true, but personally, I don't. I believe they were visions given by God and meant for people to understand.
I think that Squares have tried to pass it off as if it is something they created. In my opinion, it wasn't and we have to thank people with mental illness for having those visions and relating them to us.
Do you believe this is true ? Or do you view ALL mental illness as being negative ? Do you acknowledge that it was thanks to the gifts these people possessed that we have the institutions and scriptures we have today ?

I think you need to use a term other than 'mental illness' as the latter is value-laden with a medical view that a mental dysfunction has to be "cured". This is not to say that there are mental phenemona which are positive that fall outside the definition of "normal" human functioning. I also think saying ALL religion is a mental illness is wrong; I am comfortable with the idea that mental illness was considered in religious terms and that dreams, hallucinations, effects of psychoactive drugs etc, would have been interpreted as visions from god, etc. This does go someway to explian some of the ideas in religion. So yes, I am comfortable with the idea that otherwise "crazy" people did play an influencial role in forming religious belief systems. From an atheist standpoint, it would be hard to argue anything else without either saying their were all liars, or else that what they experienced was in some sense "real". it is also true that people with mental illness often have greater insight into the human condition as they are not necessarily repressing their intuitive awareness of other people's behavour. crazy people are not irrational, but are seeing the world is ways that most of us don't understand. it's easier to stigmatise what we don't know than to grasp that experience of reality is not the same for everyone. so even without god in the picture it is possible to appreciate that mental illness is both a gift, as well as a curse.

However, the prevelance of religious belief amongst the world populations (both today and in the past) cannot be explianed as mental illness. Most religious people function in society relatively well, even if there have been periods of mass hysteria such as war, persecution, dictatorships, which deviate from what we would consider "healthy" behaviour. That said, as the nineteenth and twenieth century illustrates, this kind of collective "madness" is not unique to religious people but was also widespread amongst (self-identified) atheists and secularists as well. personally, I find that a challanges the notion of perfect rationality with which people were able to convince themselves mass murder was a "rational" or "scientific" course of action. This is down to prevelance of a set of ideas as explanations for how the natural and social world works as ideologies, so I would not go as far as to say all religious people are mentally ill, dellusional, etc. but honestly, sanity is relative; to illustrate, 1% of people are crazy 99% of the time, whilst the other 99% are crazy 1% of the time. you just better hope that they don't do it all at once. mental illness is a problem, but is still not really understood that well- it is easy to project our own repressed fears on to "crazy" people as violent, irrational, emotional, etc, than face the prospect that we are not the 'perfect' reasoning beings we are supposed to be.

 

[Kirran]

If religion is a mental illness, does that mean that, as per the tenets of Dementheology, all religious people can go to heaven?

 

[psychoslice]

Religion of itself has nothing to do with mental illness, the one with the illness will project his illness onto whatever is happening in his life, this projection could be anything, religion, or whatever.

 

[Windwalker]

Back in the day, before people knew about mental illness, they often blamed it on demons, spirits et cetra. Therefore, I contend that religion IS a form of mental illness. Yes, it was a POSITIVE form of mental illness, but it was mental illness all the same.
We are often taught to address mental illness as negative.I don't believe that. I believe that mental illness has given humanity a lot of things. If you are schizophrenic, then it would be easy before there was medicine or knowledge of it, to portray what you saw as visions given by God. Some people might think that is true, but personally, I don't. I believe they were visions given by God and meant for people to understand.
I think that Squares have tried to pass it off as if it is something they created. In my opinion, it wasn't and we have to thank people with mental illness for having those visions and relating them to us.
Do you believe this is true ? Or do you view ALL mental illness as being negative ? Do you acknowledge that it was thanks to the gifts these people possessed that we have the institutions and scriptures we have today ?

I think there are those who are gifted that are misdiagnosed as having a mental illness, but it is not in actuality. An illness creates dysfunction. You have those such as Freud who saw any form of transpersonal experience as regressive infantilism, whereas his counterpart Carl Jung understood them in a different light, one of higher advanced states. But to compare the schizophrenic with the mystic, which is the actual comparison to make, there are similarities and marked differences.

The schizophrenic may have the "vision", of something genuinely advanced, but his mind processes it and filters it in such a way as its leads to delusional thinking. Experiencing the transcendent is interpreted that he is Jesus Christ, and unique in the world, all others are lost, but he has the truth. The mystic on the other hand, having a similar experience understands that we are all the Christ, that we are One. They are able to take the experience and integrate it into a healthy vision of themselves and the world, one which leads to advances, rather than dysfunction.

You see the point? It's not a mental illness in the mystic and the visionary, even though the experience of the transcendent may be the same. Anyone can have these experiences, but what they do with them determines whether they are healthy or an illness.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Back in the day, before people knew about mental illness, they often blamed it on demons, spirits et cetra. Therefore, I contend that religion IS a form of mental illness. Yes, it was a POSITIVE form of mental illness, but it was mental illness all the same.
We are often taught to address mental illness as negative.I don't believe that. I believe that mental illness has given humanity a lot of things. If you are schizophrenic, then it would be easy before there was medicine or knowledge of it, to portray what you saw as visions given by God. Some people might think that is true, but personally, I don't. I believe they were visions given by God and meant for people to understand.
I think that Squares have tried to pass it off as if it is something they created. In my opinion, it wasn't and we have to thank people with mental illness for having those visions and relating them to us.
Do you believe this is true ? Or do you view ALL mental illness as being negative ? Do you acknowledge that it was thanks to the gifts these people possessed that we have the institutions and scriptures we have today ?

No. An illness is a mishap (it's negative) or some sort in the body or mind. Usually, illnesses are cured or treated because they cause harm to the body or mind of some sort. It's poor health because of the disease or condition of the brain or body. A Mental Illness is poor health of the mind. So if someone is clinically mentally ill, that person is in danger to themselves, to others, or it is difficult for them to take care of themselves due to their mental conditions. It has nothing to do with spirituality.

It sounds like you trying to find a balance word between "they are crazy but not that crazy" type of thing. I have seen a lot of people strengthened by their faith. Are they delusional? No. Even if they were, that isn't a mental "illness" that is a condition. Many people are delusional and lead very good lives with or without religion.

Basically, I don't see how religion in and of itself have anything to do with mental illness say as in poison has to someone's body. Likewise, I don't see how someone with mental illness and who is religious would have a mental illness because he is religious.

These dont add up in my head.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

maybe it is those who lack religion who are mentally ill and religion is the cure

 

[Revoltingest]

Most here know that my expertise in psychology stems from having been a landlord of many many shrinks.
On such tenant (very pleasant & interesting gal) gave me her view on mental illness & psychotherapy.
To paraphrase......
If your problems (eg, anxiety, obsessions, religion) don't cause you excessive difficulty, you're OK.
But if your problems interfere with enjoyment of life, then seek help.

What does this mean?
Religion is mental illness it's useful to treat it as such.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

how many religious people would say their religion interferes with their enjoyment of life? I think most would say their religion increases their enjoyment of life which is why the lack of religion is closer to a mental illness

 

[zuhairabs]

Probably those who think the religion is mental illness means they are following wrong religion or false religion better find true religion.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Most here know that my expertise in psychology stems from having been a landlord of many many shrinks.
On such tenant (very pleasant & interesting gal) gave me her view on mental illness & psychotherapy.
To paraphrase......
If your problems (eg, anxiety, obsessions, religion) don't cause you excessive difficulty, you're OK.
But if your problems interfere with enjoyment of life, then seek help.

What does this mean?
Religion is mental illness it's useful to treat it as such.

I like your doctors. Mine just said "Well, if you don't cause harm to yourself, to others, and can take care of yourself then we don't need to call the police" The Law doesn't look between the cracks.