Definition of "delusion" in DSM-5

[Edwardo Piet]

I borrowed a copy of the DSM-5 from my university library today. In the glossary of technical terms, "delusion" is defined as

A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly held despite what almost everyone else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary.

So far, so good. It then adds:

The belief is not ordinarily accepted by other members of the person's culture or subculture (i.e., it is not an article of religious faith).

Why do religious beliefs get a free pass? So if you're convinced Elvis Presley is still alive, you're delusional but if you think Jesus of Nazareth is still alive and can hear/answer your prayers, you're just a Christian. Why the double standard?

I know why they get a free pass.

Because you missed the part I've just bolded:

A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly held despite what almost everyone else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary.

It's NOT despite what almost everyone else believes. Almost everyone DOES believe in that nonsense. To have an imaginary friend is only non-delusional because it's so goddamn common. You're welcome.

Apart from that it is batshit crazy and psychotic, yes. There's sanity in numbers. When 80% of the world is crazy it's the 20% sane people that are considered a little odd for not having an imaginary friend.

---

I borrowed a copy of the DSM-5 from my university library today. In the glossary of technical terms, "delusion" is defined as


So far, so good. It then adds:


Why do religious beliefs get a free pass? So if you're convinced Elvis Presley is still alive, you're delusional but if you think Jesus of Nazareth is still alive and can hear/answer your prayers, you're just a Christian. Why the double standard?

I feel like the answer lies squarely in the definition. (bold mine)

DAMNIT I thought I was original but you totally ninja'd me

You're right.

---

I feel like the answer lies squarely in the definition. (bold mine)

I think that part of the definition is unnecessary. Galileo believed the earth revolved around the sun despite what almost everyone else believed. Was he delusional?

The definition is the premise. I thought we are debating what part of the definition means religious beliefs aren't considered a psychiatric delusion. We are already accepting the definition as it is the premise.

Are you questioning what part of the definition means religious beliefs aren't considered a psychiatric definition or are you questioning whether you agree with the definition or think certain parts of it are unnecessary? You have to be clear with your question otherwise your definition will be so flexible and equivocal that you will flip back and forth too much to be addressing anything coherent.