Some not so bright atheists (even when they call themselves "brights" - a sad example of collective narcissism) often liken religion - or more precisely: religiosity - to a mental disorder.
Nobody denies that there are some forms of religiosity that are indeed (linked to) a mental disorder, especially among so-called "fundamentalists", but that does not mean at all that religion as such is a disorder or based on one.
Many aspects of life can become a disorder: eating, sex, gaming, sports.. you name it. Nobody in his or her right mind would call users of online games "mentally disordered" just because some of them become addicted to it and lose control of their life.
As for religion: it is natural to, and grounded in, the human constitution and condition; there is nothing pathological or abnormal about it.
"The explanation for religious beliefs and behaviors is to be found in the way all human minds work. (...) what matters here are properties of minds that are found in all members of our species with normal brains." (Pascal Boyer: "Religion explained" p.2) - That does not mean that all people with a normal human brain are religious.
Just keep in mind that the vast majority of all human beings living or dead were or are religious; especially if you look at the history of our species, secularism and atheism are a fringe phenomenon, up until about 200 years ago virtually unknown. It is absurd to claim that 90 or 95 or even 98 per cent of all human beings suffered from a "mental disorder".
8
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
14 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.
I've treated patients for Religious Mental Delusions.
There have been patients diagnosed with gaming disorders. And all the others you mention.
Just because they do occur doesn't mean they aren't true disorders?
Believing fervently in something that can't be proved - that does seem like the basis for a mental disorder to me. And never questioning it. That might just be the crux of the matter.
Those of us non-believers either remained how we were at birth (without religion) or we questioned at some point - and continued to question until we realized we'd disproved the existence of god(s).
Sure religions exist - but so do Harry Potter fans?
RavenCT
Level 9
July 22, 2019
0
@Matias That's not how diagnosis in the DSM works. It would be a main diagnosis followed by 'with delusions of...'.
Also religious delusions are a very hard issue to treat. How do you help the client towards reality when you have to allow for religious freedom as well?
Of course it's a bit easier when they think they are Jesus or Mary complete with stigmata - but for those of us who don't believe in the first place? It's eye opening and sad.
@Matias For the Atheist it's simple - we stop believing the fairy tale.
There's no proof - why would we believe it? We have a lot of trouble accepting that other people go on just fine accepting the whole thing - without doubt - buying into it - even when it hurts them - financially or emotionally.
If something were hurting a Mental Health client financially or emotionally that weren't religion based - you can bet a MH professional would take a good look at it. But, because it is religion based,- it can become a sticky Catch-22.
The only part of religion I liked for clients at all - was the comfort it could bring to someone who was grieving.
I think for very many believers, religious faith is the result of brainwashing or indoctrination or psychological duress, not some mental illness. Religious belief often requires big-time rationalization though. To believe that the Christian God is really a God of love and mercy plainly is absurd, for example, but the faithful will jump through intellectual hoops to justify their beliefs to themselves.
AlasBabylon
Level 8
July 19, 2019
0
You are the eternal optimist if you think that 90, 95 or 98% of humanity aren't suffering from some form or religious mental disorder.......especially in todays world. lol But I do agree with most of your post. 
patchoullijulie
Level 8
July 18, 2019
0
Talking to a guy in the sky is indeed a mental disorder, and by far not only the fundies do it. The only reason psychologists do not equate such people to any other mental patient that thinks they are talking to imaginary beings that aren't from major religions is that there are too many to be able to treat(and they are afraid for their personal safety). Doesn't matter what percentage of humans did this, or is doing it now. A mental disorder is a mental disorder.
With that Pascal quote you just talked yourself, self proclaimed atheist, into the category of people having a mental disorder, btw. Congratulations.
I also think you're dishonest about your beliefs and are here to try to convert folks.
psyk
Level 3
July 18, 2019
1
Well worded! And welcome.
I've always thought all humans in general have a "mental disorder". I believe that our existence is extremely subjective. I put mental disorder in quotations because if our existence is extremely subjective then how can one way or the other in terms of thinking be classified as a mental disorder? It matters not what is the "norm".
Piece2YourPuzzle
Level 8
July 18, 2019
0
Belief in supernatural and imaginary beings can be defined as a mental illness.
mischl
Level 8
July 18, 2019
1
Anything can be defined any way you like. Atheism can be defined as a mental illness.
...as long as you’re not working in medicine or any other branch of science.
Who defines normal and what time frame and locale are we to consider this 'normal' to operate in?
evidentialist
Level 8
July 18, 2019
0
I didn't know about this "Bright" movement until now. I've had a chance to read about it on Wikipedia.
I have to admit that it does sound arrogant, regardless of what the intent of the originator was. I would have preferred something like..... the illuminati. 
AtheistReader
Level 7
July 18, 2019
0
Anymore, there’s no excuse to believe in classic religion; you either buy all of it, or none of it. It’s now a social structure based on exposed myths.
There are many behaviors attributable to disorders. Enough traits to be clinically diagnosed? Maybe not, but often enough to bear watching..
Religion is taught and learned - it’s not genetic. I’m living proof - and my BS meter just went off 
Human minds may be susceptible to bullshit, but it needs to be placed there.
“Just keep in mind that the vast majority of all human beings living or dead” did not realize they were living on a sphere orbiting a gaseous star constituting a solar system within a galaxy orbiting a black hole within an expanding universe ... or that they’d ascended from a more primitive form of hominid … nor any of the vast human discoveries attributable to a modern segment of humanity that might be statistically described as “a fringe phenomenon, up until about 200 years ago virtually unknown.”
Yes, anymore, healthy humans choose religion - and it’s a pathetic choice ~
Varn
Level 8
July 18, 2019
0
Scientific knowledge, while very valuable and fascinating, does not even address, let alone answer the overwhelming basic questions about reality. You might sit proudly on the golden throne of scientific knowledge but underneath it all is quicksand.
Religion can be thought of as a collection of artistic expressions, to be experienced, not to be believed or disbelieved. Even some religions demand belief, but anyone who sees religion as an alternative explanation for nature, to be believed or disbelieved is missing the whole point of religion.
Varn:
@WilliamFleming Dang - my BS Meter went off again You don’t believe in science, you understand it. Religion is myth, nothing to do with reality.. Keep your myth out of my reality and we’ll be fine. Otherwise, you’ll simply get more facts - verifiable facts, from me ~
@Varn Sounds like you might ought to send in your meter for calibration. When did you last have that done?
If you think you understand reality based on the findings of science, you are mistaken. Read some books on modern physics. Reality is not the way it seems. Science offers superficial explanations but does not even address the deep questions of existence.
Ultimate reality can not be seen or understood using our human space/time/matter model. What good religion does is foster deep awareness, appreciation and gratitude for the staggering implications of the mysteries of reality, thereby lending infinite value to every moment of conscious awareness.
Varn:
@WilliamFleming There is no deep question to existence; there’s the fact and reality that life evolved, instinctual behaviors followed, and humans eventually became aware of both the process and those behaviors. Are you implying that we’re gods, entrusted with magical powers?
I’ve recognized this too late as a continuing debate, perhaps the difference between Atheists & Fence-sitters. If you’re confused by what’s below, frightened by reality, or mortified that we’ve not yet figured out everything ...maybe it’s best you remain on that fence. I’m not, have been down here all my life, and honesty, can’t get enough! So come on down ..the weather’s …really hot
@Varn If you think there are no deep questions about existence you are wearing a blindfold.
There’s no such thing as magic but our understanding of nature is paper-thin. You are taking it all for granted without question.
“Try and penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind all the discernible concatenations, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am, in point of fact, religious.”
Albert Einstein
I agree that the term "brights" is a total embarrassment. and to suggest that religious people are suffering from a mental disorder is ridiculous.
Moravian
Level 8
July 18, 2019
5
I would say that the "Brights" suffer from a marketing/branding problem. And I wouldn't say it is ridiculous to suggest that religion is a mental disorder. Of course, I think we tend to over-define what constitutes mental disorders.
@AtheistReader apparently the word was coined by Paul Geisert, a biology teacher.Not a good choice IMHO. Some theists I have known are very intelligent and certainly not suffering from mental illness. Cognitive dissonance maybe ?
Just another example of one group of bigoted, mentally ill people projecting onto and bashing another group of similar people. Kind of like The Taliban and America's Repub party.
TomMcGiverin
Level 8
July 18, 2019
2
This assumes of course that a deviation from "norm" can rightly be described as "mental disorder." Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD) as described by DSM is essentially a personality trait that does not conform to the societal "norm." Then there is the problem how we define the "norm." In DSM 3, homosexuality was classified as a sexual disorder. To be sure, heterosexuality outnumbers homosexuality, so homosexuality was a deviation from the norm.
So for all those reasons (and more), the concept of mental disorder as a mere numbers game (how many of us have it as opposed to not) isn't very convincing.
Another way of looking at it is to think about viruses. All of us carry spectrum of viruses, and some are helpful and some might be harmful, to the general health of our bodies. I liken religion (and I don't believe that there is natural "religiosity" to us, but that's another topic) to viruses. It is a self-replicating set of ideas that can be transmitted from person to person, or more likely inherited from parents. Overall, I tend to believe that this virus (actually, more accurately called "meme" as it was originally defined, that is, self-replicating ideas) has (and has had) a tremendously harmful effect on the carriers.
In a town stricken with plague, just because the majority carries the plague virus, doesn't make it "normal" and therefore not a disease......
AtheistReader
Level 7
July 18, 2019
2
Fortunately DSM -5 is somewhat more enlightened!
The difference between norm and deviance is not a numbers game either. Is religiosity a deviance and if so, what is it deviant from?
I don't think I got my points across very clearly.
I was responding to the OP's point that "the vast majority of all human beings living or dead were or are religious; especially if you look at the history of our species, secularism and atheism are a fringe phenomenon, up until about 200 years ago virtually unknown. It is absurd to claim that 90 or 95 or even 98 per cent of all human beings suffered from a "mental disorder"." This was an argument based on the concept that the difference between norm and deviance can be based on a numbers game. And in many ways it is a numbers game (with some added complexity)
The concept of "deviance" in DSM's have a bit more complexity to it, but not that much.
I am not arguing that "religiosity" is deviance, and I am certainly not arguing what we consider to be "norm" is necessarily healthy for the body politic. I am advocating religion as a virus analogy, which is a bit different from the concept of mental disorder. But it is "virus" or "meme" that affects our minds.
You say that the difference between norm and deviance is not a numbers game. I agree that it is an oversimplification. But the very name "deviance" is closely related to deviation from the norm. The norm is unually defined as the majority in any given system..... you know, within 1 (or 2) standard deviation from the median....
I am interested in learning about your idea on the difference between norm and deviance, in non-numbers game way....
200 years? Where did you get that number?
thinktwice
Level 8
July 18, 2019
2
1of5:
Made it up to support his position.
@1of5 What? You mean an alternative fact?
“The etymological root for the word atheism originated before the 5th century BCE from the ancient Greek (atheos), meaning "without god(s)". In antiquity, it had multiple uses as a pejorative term applied to those thought to reject the gods worshiped by the larger society, those who were forsaken by the gods, or those who had no commitment to belief in the gods.”
“The term denoted a social category created by orthodox religionists into which those who did not share their religious beliefs were placed.”
“The actual term atheism emerged first in the 16th century. With the spread of freethought, skeptical inquiry, and subsequent increase in criticism of religion, application of the term narrowed in scope.”
“The first individuals to identify themselves using the word atheist lived in the 18th century during the Age of
Enlightenment. The French Revolution, noted for its "unprecedented atheism," witnessed the first major political movement in history to advocate for the supremacy of human reason.”
[en.m.wikipedia.org]
@skado yep...which is why I asked the question...and ignored the post...anything with misinformation reeks of inauthenticity and pushing an agenda...ugh...I need to just block this poser
1of5:
@thinktwice don't worry, he'll retool it a bit and repost. From what he posts it looks like he's working on a book entitled: Athiesm done properly: Why you have to not believe this way and no other.
@1of5 woo hoo a best seller...not...don't we love people who tell us how to think and believe...ugh
@thinktwice
We may be missing each other on this. My comment was in support of the OP. What do you see as misinformation?
@thinktwice What Matias is pointing out is that, as identified by Skado the tipping point against religion was the Enlightenment. Before that time in Europe Christianity was a default position. The idea of religion per se did not exist as it was part of the everyday fabric and culture of life. I do have sn academic reference for this but off the top of my head I can’t remember. I will find it and post it here.
@Geoffrey51 no need...I don't need a history lesson to know what my values are...I don't see the point and I never claimed religion was a mental disorder...
@skado What century are we in? I forget....
1of5:
@thinktwice thats kinda the job of proffessional philosophers, unfortunatly, telling us what and how to think. At least it keeps (well, most of) them from being homeless.
@thinktwice Just sayin’! Sorry for the history lesson.
@thinktwice
Ok, so maybe a little closer to 300, but I was just trying to give some ballpark reference for the "200". It's not wildly off.
@Geoffrey51 no no...I appreciate learning from everyone on this site, even if I don't agree...
@skado I know...what's a 100 years or so among friends...my point was that one inaccurate fact automatically puts up a wall of questioning the rest of the article, especially when it is presented in a "of course all that I say is right" manner...it is not important to be right...it is important to have the right answers/information so that we can then determine what is the path/choice we want to make...
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
Share this post
Related Groups More
Ethical Sluts
429 members
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.