When is a Religious Belief Delusional?

[Amarok]

That is true. To the degree that a new doctrine or revelation is being introduced it should be viewed skeptically. That is why I admitted that the internal safe-guards include consistency with prior teachings and would add that this safeguard is more of a warning sign than a test. A new doctrine could be a further clarification of prior revelations and historically these have not always been accepted. That is why there are still religious Jews and why Christians do not convert to Islam.

Your last statement is false and the rest is just nonesense

---

I do not consider the practice of prayer, in and of itself, evidence of delusion. 

Nobody does 

The idea that there is a level of reality deeper (or higher depending on your perspective) and more fundamental that what is currently known does not seem on its face to be irrational. After that, it is more a difference of degree than of kind by which we evaluate its reasonableness.

Carefully worded salad

[downbeatplumb]

I do not consider the practice of prayer, in and of itself, evidence of delusion. The idea that there is a level of reality deeper (or higher depending on your perspective) and more fundamental that what is currently known does not seem on its face to be irrational. After that, it is more a difference of degree than of kind by which we evaluate its reasonableness.

To think there may be a deeper level of reality is not delusional. To act as though there is, is.

[robvalue]

I do not consider the practice of prayer, in and of itself, evidence of delusion. The idea that there is a level of reality deeper (or higher depending on your perspective) and more fundamental that what is currently known does not seem on its face to be irrational. After that, it is more a difference of degree than of kind by which we evaluate its reasonableness.

To think there may be a deeper level of reality is not delusional. To act as though there is, is.

To claim you know stuff about it, also is. I'd be shocked if there isn't "more going on" than we can detect; perhaps that we will ever detect. That's not the same as acting like you have special information about it.

Like I said in the other thread, belief in a generic creator is just a guess at a fundamental question for which we have no way of knowing. It makes no difference to anything. But claiming to know stuff about this creator, and especially to interact, is entering delusion terrirotry. It's easy to see why, because of how thoroughly theists all disagree with each other about what this "one creator" is like, and what it wants. They can't all be right, but they can all be wrong.

---

PS: to my earlier point, say I have a religious belief in gravity. What would that even mean? Most people would expect me to drop the "religious" part, because it's a demonstrable fact. Religion needs to speculate on the unknowable, it seems to me.

[polymath257]

From the tail end of another thread…

Whether or not a theist's perceptions of God represent a "delusion" (in the sense of being a firmly maintained yet irrational belief) was the conversation I was interested in having.

So I say, lets have that conversation.

Let me first say that, as a Christian, this is very difficult conversation to not take personally. ‘Delusion’ has a very negative connotation, even when used colloquially. For many Christians, and I suppose believers in general, their religious convictions are central to their identity and serve as the core around which their values and principles develop. Having it maligned is perceived as dismissive and disrespectful.

At the same time, sincere and thoughtful believers are very much aware that there are seriously disturbed people who truly believe supernatural entities have directed them to do dangerous and/or heinous acts (a mother drowning her three children in a bathtub because she thought they were demons, comes to mind). For a non-believer, to lump mainstream Christians in with people who are clearly mentally ill and failing to acknowledge various safe guards (that are by no means infallible) built into religious traditions, is at best IMHO thoughtless and at worst offensive and provocative.

So for the purposes of this conversation, I will assume that ‘delusion’ is being used moderately by atheists, not indicative of actual mental illness, but rather as something that hinders reasoning. As such, what criteria must be met for a belief to qualify as a delusion? Some I have heard some of the following proposed and with which I agree:

- Unquestionable certainty.
- Resistance to scrutiny.
- Contrary to what is demonstrably false.

That said, the devil is in the details. My initial question to atheists is this. How do you justify the claim that all religious beliefs, or those most commonly held, satisfy the above criteria (or others you may propose that are not listed)?

For believers, I also raise the issue of how one can examine one’s own beliefs and those of others to avoid the above criteria. I alluded to safe-guards commonly found within religious traditions. Some of those are as follows:

- The predictions of a prophet must be 100% accurate.

This assumes the predictions are interpreted correctly.

- If someone feels called by God to a specific course of action and it violates Scripture then it didn’t come from God.

This assumes that the scriptures are accurate. But this needs to be established.

- If a personal revelation contradicts the clear teaching of the tradition it is not valid.

This assumes the tradition isn't itself delusional. This has to be established.

- To the extent that the ‘inspired’ behavior seems extreme or overtly dangerous the more clearly it should align with Scriptural teachings. For example, missionary work can be very dangerous and may require great personal sacrifice and yet it is very clearly justified by the Great Commission.

Again, this assumes the scriptures in question are authoritative. This needs to be established.

- Is the belief motivated by sincere love and concern for others or does it appear grounded in fear or deny the humanity of others?

Almost all religion fails miserably here.

[robvalue]

My first contact with prayer was when I was 5. We had a school lead assembly. We were all forced to pray. As far as I was concerned, I was being instructed to put my hands together and then talk, out loud, to no one. I did it because I was a good boy, but I recognized this was ridiculous right away. It was clear most of the other kids did too, and many refused to do it. I assumed the teachers had some weird ideas going on that made no sense, and that they really thought they were talking to someone, somehow.

To me, and probably most of the kids, they seemed delusional. I just got on with learning (especially maths which I loved) and didn't think about it too much.

This continued at the next school, with pretty much the same results. I came to realize this weird idea was fairly widespread through adults. I don't remember ever talking to my parents about it. I just ignored this nonsense, as it didn't affect me too much after assemblies had finished each day.

[polymath257]

There are various stages of delusion.

A mild delusion is, say, thinking you have to count to 5 every time you walk through a doorway in order to be safe. At this level, it harms nobody except for taking up time.

A stronger delusion is thinking that there are invisible gnomes and unicorns in my garden that make it grow. I use the (correct) evidence that my garden grows to conclude (falsely) that the gnomes and unicorns exist. Part of the delusion is my thinking that a growing garden is evidence for gnomes and unicorns. This is the level of some religious believers. They believe, but it doesn't seriously affect their lives.

A stronger level of delusion happens when it is believed that the gnomes and unicorns need to be fed or treated well in order for my garden to grow. Perhaps that involves watering my garden (so the gnomes and unicorns are not thirsty). The fact that my garden then grows is taken as further proof of the existence of the gnomes and unicorns. this is the level of most religious believers. The beliefs affect their lives by taking up substantial time and energy, but there are side benefits unrelated to the actual belief that have positive effects.

An even strong level is when there is a belief that the gnomes and unicorns are everywhere and need to be appeased all the time. This can start having significant negative effects on the rest of life, including loss of friends, etc. This is closer to the level of a fundamentalist, but one who allows that others have rights also.

Finally, there is the level where I think that displeasing gnomes and unicorns is so dangerous that I am willing to imprison or kill anyone who questions their existence or the methods used to appease them. This is seriously dangerous to others. This is the level of ISIS or Jim Jones.

[Minimalist]

As such, what criteria must be met for a belief to qualify as a delusion? Some I have heard some of the following proposed and with which I agree:

- Unquestionable certainty.
- Resistance to scrutiny.
- Contrary to what is demonstrably false.

That said, the devil is in the details.

The devil is in the details only after you adequately address those three.

Apply those criteria to the basis of xtian belief.... that jesus rose from the dead... and let's go from there.

[Whateverist]

To think there may be a deeper level of reality is not delusional. To act as though there is, is.

To claim you know stuff about it, also is. I'd be shocked if there isn't "more going on" than we can detect; perhaps that we will ever detect. That's not the same as acting like you have special information about it.

Especially when that special information is in a special book whose specialness is vouchsafed by that very same book.

---

PS: to my earlier point, say I have a religious belief in gravity.

Me too! I'm calling it The Force. As someone who has skateboarded down hills I am in fact a force user.

---

A stronger level of delusion happens when it is believed that the gnomes and unicorns need to be fed or treated well in order for my garden to grow. Perhaps that involves watering my garden (so the gnomes and unicorns are not thirsty). The fact that my garden then grows is taken as further proof of the existence of the gnomes and unicorns. this is the level of most religious believers. The beliefs affect their lives by taking up substantial time and energy, but there are side benefits unrelated to the actual belief that have positive effects.

An even strong level is when there is a belief that the gnomes and unicorns are everywhere and need to be appeased all the time. This can start having significant negative effects on the rest of life, including loss of friends, etc. This is closer to the level of a fundamentalist, but one who allows that others have rights also.

Finally, there is the level where I think that displeasing gnomes and unicorns is so dangerous that I am willing to imprison or kill anyone who questions their existence or the methods used to appease them. This is seriously dangerous to others. This is the level of ISIS or Jim Jones.

Anyone unwilling to sacrifice a virgin to appease the gnomes and unicorns is not a true gardener.

[The Grand Nudger]

Anyone unwilling to sacrifice a virgin to appease the gnomes and unicorns is not a true gardener.

If it'll make my callas really pop....line em up. 

[Whateverist]

Anyone unwilling to sacrifice a virgin to appease the gnomes and unicorns is not a true gardener.

If it'll make my callas really pop....line em up. 

Yeah, from now on when someone says what a green thumb I must have, I'm going to give them a knowing wink and tell them it is red actually.