[Vision2020] News Article

[Art Deco]

Re:  Poor Pastor Wilson's Problems with Non-Believers

No rational person would claim that mental disease is limited to religious
persons.

There are many definitions for mental illness.  A commonly accepted,
clinically useful one dealing with the mental illnesses that are delusional
in nature is "The holding and acting upon beliefs which are improbable to
the extent that a person's ability to function in the most lawful,
productive, and useful way without intentionally or unintentionally bringing
harm to themselves and/or others is reduced."

By nature mental illness is not a yes or no condition but seems to exist on
a continuum from none (or very little) to severe.

There are many well known behavioral scientists from all across the spectrum
of approaches to their science who have studied and pointed out the
similarities of religious belief and mental illness, many saying they are
more than similar.  In short, they speak about an individual's use of
psychological defense mechanisms like fantasy, rationalization,
compartmentalization, denial, reaction formation, etc.  Everyone uses these
mechanisms.  These mechanisms become pathological when used over a long time
without the support of evidence, in the face of contrary evidence, or in the
face of contradictions  -- a 45 year old person who insists there is a Santa
Claus in the traditional sense or believes that unicorns exists in the same
way mice do or believes that 2+2=4 and 2+2=5 are examples.

Many behavioral scientists have pointed out that society tends to ignore the
fantasies of the religious unless they are far beyond the pale of culturally
accepted norms.  Oral Roberts is not hardly chastised by most for his
alleged conversations with some alleged god.  However, when Brian Mitchell
claims that his alleged god told him to abduct and to impress Elizabeth
Smart into being his bride, then most of society draws the line.  It is
interesting to note that there is no way, short of an examination for
internal contradictions, to test empirically whether Oral Roberts mystical
claims are any more true than Brian Mitchell's.

The religious do not like to have their beliefs called fantasy.  However,
there are thousands of alleged gods whose characterizations are
contradictory to each other but are worshipped by peoples of the world.  For
almost any alleged god(s), there are people who are as apodictic about
saying that their god(s) are the only true one(s) and the rest are false as
Douglas Wilson is about his alleged god.

Unfortunately, there is no unequivocal method (short of examining each
belief for logical consistency) to test which set of religious beliefs, if
any, is true.  (If there were, we would not be having this discussion.)
Given this condition, it is obvious that at most one of the sets of
religious creeds is true.  The rest, then must be false, and therefore,
fantasy.  Using this framework as a starting point, the conclusions of the
behavioral scientists mentioned above seem at this point in humankind's
quest for knowledge, the most likely.

When beliefs in the secular world are fixed on fantastic non-religious
matters like those fixed by the deeply religious on religious matters,
society is much more likely to recommend the secular believer receive
treatment.  Society is not as tolerant of people who claim to be and act as
Napoleon as it is of those that claim to talk to some alleged god(s).

I wonder if this unfortunate person (the root of this discussion) who, on
the alleged advice of some alleged god, beat her two children to death with
a rock would have done so if she hadn't been religious.  Maybe, if her
symptoms were expressed as nonreligious fantasies, they would have attracted
more notice, she could have been steered to treatment, and possibly this
tragedy could have been avoided.

Of course many non-religious persons can do utterly despicable acts.  But if
their mental health symptoms are non-religious in nature, and therefore less
tolerated, then some of these despicable acts are more likely to be
preventable by treatment intervention.

The other conclusion about living in a dream world is too obvious to state.


Wayne Fox




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Jones" <credenda@moscow.com>
To: "'Vision 20/20'" <vision2020@moscow.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 6:27 AM
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] News Article


> Wayne Fox noticed and noted:
>
> > He [Smith] said the Laneys were a "very stable, loving family," and
> the
> > suspect has no history of mental illness [except deeply held religious
> > convictions one might conclude from the facts given]
>
> Notice how what Wayne does *not* say is far more revealing than what he
> does say. Why is it that Wayne-sorts could never dream of posting a
> crime story that would even hint that secularism could be false, e.g.,
> Wayne commenting, "Scott Peterson's alleged murder of his wife shows
> that his secularism is abnormal and dangerous to society."
>
> Secularism is utterly unquestionable in the modern world. It just
> couldn't be false. It is the air and the sun. That is a close-mindedness
> never imagined by religious folks. Americans are well-trained in what
> supposedly falsifies religious outlooks. What counts against secularism?
> Imagine if you can.
>
> Secularism is held so dogmatically that its defenders can't even imagine
> that the world could be otherwise. Let's call this Fundamentalist
> Secularism. It is the deepest American creed and a favorite of Vision
> 2020.
>
> Doug Jones
>
> _____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
> ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
>
>