I do believe the policy is no links in forums?
Anyhow, I googled religion and psychosis for the sake of it. Interesting results.. Just a starter.
If you're speaking about organized religions versus psychosis, are you implying that they are synonyms? LOL!
I figured that... Ya know, I wish some of those psychos would give me some of their damn money instead of always throwing it in the divine "offering plate!" Ha-ha!
Start your own religion. Not difficult, by the way some people use their minds . LOL
I wish us the best of luck then. Hmm..., what are you going to name yours? LOL!
Just like Prince, it's going to be only a Sign !
'If you're speaking about organized religions versus psychosis, are you implying that they are synonyms? LOL!'
You just won yourself a follower.
uh, I personaly know SEVERAL people, not with physchosis exactly, but some serious problems, directly resulting from religion.
I know anti-religious people who are pretty warped, too. They seem to have venom and pushiness in common.
religion is just a cultural expression of our collective internal world. what you blame on religion is actually the external forces that you allow to invade your personal choice in order to purchase 1.approval 2. love 3. acceptance.
what is making people crazy is not religion, it is fear.
Which religion spends it's efforts creating.
religion is a mechanized version of a process that was meant to be individual. please read my banana post.
(it's five a.m. but I gotta say this before I actually get the work I was supposed to be doing done.)
G-d is a metaphor for a person's feelings of empowerment. Does a god exist, yes. Because a person can rise above the illusions of chaos and make himself god of his own universe. Your attitude towards G-d is a mirror of your own internal power. The paradox is this, Gd is man's madness that enables him to find a fixed point of sanity in the seemingly chaotic churning of his existence.
that would be the consequence of people's underlying fears. fear tactics don't work on those who are not afraid to begin with.
you are pre-plagiarizing my notes before i finish writing the book?
So funny how 'logical sensation' becomes the absolute asset, to the existing conscious engagement. Many swing on the pendulum of extreme pre-ism and then post-ism only to end up in the same place they began. But either side of the pitch is still the Ism.
To consider any sensation, consciously, can only limit one to that sensation. Madness is just another guise of conscious limitation. Mashed Potatoes of thought. Still thought now buttered up with sense and salted with regret. Crazy stuff.
Ey twenty one. geez, same page as always? please do not tell me we are writing the same book! (no fair, I've been working on mine for years) i'm going to have to re-read what you just wrote, because i think i missed something.
I hope he doesn't "quote" others as much in his book, as you will, though... LOL!
I know the limitation is inevitable. something so large in scope must pass through the narrow lenses of human words and logic. But it is like unfolding a quilt the size of the entire mantel of the earth from a table napkin.
hence "it has not been tainted by the human tongue". it is virtually impossible to communicate its scope, yet it is so elegantly simple. Language cheapens it. Without language however it is nothing but madness.
i'll send you an email soon!
Yeah, it is called "pattern recognition." Plain & simple...
hmmmm....yes, but once again, that cheapens it.
What, my intuition cheapens it? How so?
No not at all. My point is to say it is just a pattern is to under-represent the implication to our existence. Hence it is cheapened by words.
I just have a habit of simplifying things, since one of the most unproductive fetishes of human nature, is to complicate the most simple aspects of life. I could use all types of creative adjectives to describe such things, but I only do that when I'm feeling foolish & giddy. I do find it interesting, watching beings with so-called higher levels of awareness...say & speak about things that are so elementary. Ha-ha!
Now, go out there and find a new recipe; ya got some cooking to do, you know, food for the soul... LOL!
what is elementary? there is really no such thing as elementary because everything is the same, the expression changes. So if I may prick your bubble of illusion. the illusion that you are above those who think they are above makes you exactly like them.
same sound different letter.
Elementary is totally different than a lost sense of complexity. Vision and blindness are two totally different things - without your "same sound different letter" theory. One could also say, same sh*t (dung) being scooped with a different shovel.
You can't prick my bubble, unless you can penetrate & break your own existence. Ha-ha!
(anyway) my point is the essence is the same. and I don't literally think i can prick your bubble, it was an expression.
what you call elementary has its counterparts that can be viewed as complex. I mean we are bickering constantly about petty things but to an outsider we may be talking way over their heads...and then there will be those who think we're a bunch of dodos, but actually we probably think they're dodos.
point is, different perspectives equalize because we are really just talking about the same things said in different ways.
"Religious beliefs and delusions alike can arise from neurologic lesions"
Joseph M. Pierre MD, Faith or Delusion? At the Crossroads of Religion and Psychosis (Journal of Psychiatric Practice)
Well, you have to have your brain damaged to believe in a God that doesn't exist !
Doesn't account for the very many CT scans and MRI's of religious people that show no neurological damage.
I dunno Val, I am not the Medical Doctor who ran the research. Care to share with us any reference to these very many scans and mris
Nobody has actually done any serious study testing any hypothetical link between religion and psychosis because the very idea defies common sense, but I can reference a case in which a devoutly religious young man was scanned for suspected hydrocephaly. CT scan showed nothing wrong, just a large cranial capacity.
Most religious people are mentally sound and likely have sustained no neurological damage. Some have mental illness or have sustained some neurological damage. Most atheists are mentally sound and possessing undamaged brains as well. Some aren't.
Linking belief or lack thereof with brain damage not only flies in the face of common sense, it is bigoted and insulting. It is also grossly insensitive to the mentally ill, because it comes across as suggesting that any position you happen to not like must somehow result from their mental illness rather than honest, thought out disagreement.
hey look lady, I will gladly tell you i suffer from a diagnosed mental illness myself.
The point remains, I started a thread, you joined in on the conversation. I referenced a scholarly article in which a Medical Doctor, in a Psychiatric Journal has done SERIOUS STUDY TESTING on this very issue. Furthermore, there has been more than one study on the subject. As opposed to my referenced and THOUGHT OUT contribution what have you provided?
I have been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia, I have been under forced treatment and I have an IQ you probably couldn't dream of. I got very good marks at university studying philosophy and that was without trying too hard and with an addiction to Class A drugs.
You have shown your own ignorance. Mental illness has nothing to do with intelligence. However, it does relate to physical brain disturbances. I never made any sweeping generalisations. I leave that to amateurs like yourself.
Having a great deal of personal experience with family and friends who have various forms of mental illness, I can verify that some of the brightest minds of all time have also suffered from a form of mental illness.
The world would be an incredibly boring place without them. (Maybe that should be "us". I think we are all on the edge at times...)
So favored Wiz, I got yer back.
Well said, Wizard, but you still have a problem!
Medical doctors have been wrong before, too, and serious scholarship does not draw conclusions based on one study.
I strongly considered being a church pastor. Still not ruled it out
Easy money if you can swallow that pride.
If God has not called you to Pastor, how can you become a Pastor?
Just so you know, most denominations check out PAstors before they allow them to Pastor. Some denominations require a written test to be taken by those who desire to pastor or preach. They do this to make sure the person knows the Bible well enough to do the job.
And all those TV pastors loaded as Hell? Did they pass the exam ? I wonder ! LOL
I know the Bible better than most of them !
I study the bible regularly. I have also quizzed long standing pastors and priests to test my knowledge. The results were extremely satisfying.
I do fancy that Wiz would pass that test with an "A!"
Actually, historically speaking, I believe you have to have a LOT of pride and an over abundance of arrogance in order to do well as an evangelist preacher. Their "charisma" is more about being daring and arrogance than it is good sense. People are somehow attracted to that like moths to a blowtorch.
One might suggest that psychology itself is psychotic. Is it real or is it a delusion or an illusion?
Religion, in it's simplest form, is following a certain set of rules and regulations. I am fairly certain that nearly everyone, if not everyone, follows certain rules in some form or another.
Yeah, but ya know, there is people out there that think our entire existence is an illusion.
Yep, most people have guidelines to what they think is right or wrong; most of it stems from individual conscience. But, why is it not left up to the individual? Most, if not all, organized religions seem to cross over that line and tell you what is right or wrong without ever living in your shoes and/or seeing it from your side of the fence. Is that right?
religion is popcorn transcendental meditation. You know, some really cool dude get it, (hey bananas can grow everywhere if you plant to darn things!)they get banana nirvana! they get high, they share it to the rest of the jungle animals, the monkeys hear it, then they ape it(not really getting the whole concept of everybody can plant their own banana stalks and grow their own banana tree). cool dude dies, then, top monkey brings it back to down to jungle loop of "this is holy banana tree of cool dude, now line up and I give you banana, you there...line up and show me some respect you little stupid monkey, bow before holy banana tree to get banana!"
Oh, that's where the phrase "going bananas" came from. Hmm, I thought it related to people going bonkers.
I know; nice choice of fruit... Ha-ha!
i don't know how to do the emoticons, to tell you the truth. I can only do
I haven't found one to properly represent my madness yet, but the big smiley works for now:
Yes everyone lives by a certain set of rules and regulations, but religious rules require one to believe in superstition, magic, and things that are just against common sense.
Funny thing is that many religions actually prohibit superstition and magic.
Although they fail to see their own brands of superstition and magic for what they are. Without being disrespectful, transubstantiation comes to mind. There doesn't seem to be any real evidence that it's more than hearsay.
we are all by nature superstitious, psych 101 Dan. Psychosis and religion are both a little more extreme that superstition. Magic... that's not even worth talking about.
There is a difference bertween miracles and magic.
That is rather awkward. Religion is superstition so I will assume you are referring to Other superstitions? Out of interest, seeing the thread is regarding religion and psychosis, are you either religious or psychotic or both?
in my country there is a song that goes " the coconut nut is giant nut, if you eat too much you get very fat. the coconut nut is a giant nut but the coconut nut is not a nut, it's a coco fruit from a coco tree from the coco plant family"
names names...i believe crazy people get lost in their unconscious reality. their insanity represents an internal struggle to unify a fragmentation of the self, where the self ceases to find its way back to being whole. the unconscious GPS is taking it around in a route using a different language. So the mind gets lost in the symbolism and fail to see how they translate in "real" life.
In a way, religion founders (or inspirations, not necessarily founders) attempt to unify the fragmented truths but it is too submerged in the madness of man to successfully lift our awareness such that we will see why and where and when we have gone mad.
The repair is exactly like slow process of self-therapy. Because there is no therapist, the crazy person has to make sense of his own madness. This is where we are now, we are trying to achieve some level of sanity by questioning what is sane. "what is reality?" sort of questions mirrors this.
Hi friend SirDent
I agree with you. Moses, Jesus, Krishna, Zoroaster and Socrates were all normal persons doing day to day work better than others.
I am an Ahmadi peaceful Muslim
Yes, but they don't include being sent to a lake of fire for all eternity to roast if I refuse to love the rule maker.
Another"look at the stupid religious peoples" thread.
Ha ha ha ain't they just the dumbest people! They believe in trying to be good and for what? You can't buy beer or cigaretes with any of that! Our commune has outlawed religion when we take our peyote we talk to aliens! And anyone who matters prefers aliens to God, he so not in, and the rules, are you serious! I'm going to do what ever I want to and nobody is going to tell me how to behave!
So - are you telling me that you genuinely think that religious people are "good" compared to nonreligious people?
Your inability to say anything meaningful is duly noted.
yes it is true that there is nothing meaningful about your being fascinating.
Case in point. Sorry it bothers you that I am so fantastic. This is perhaps not the best place to work through your self esteem issues though.
A "safe" place would probably be more rewarding. If you tell me where you are I am sure I can recommend some one. I have a lot of friends in that business.
I think your awesome! What are you talking about? There is no rhyme or reason for you being fascinating and yet I can claim it, tell everyone in the room...hey mark is great and fascinating....why? Who cares, why? all these other guys are stupid! You're just great, and awesome and everyone here or in the planet, pales in comparison to your awesomeness.
Who needs a shrink, when I can read your posts and beliefs and then I'm all better. You are such an inspirational character...
OH, don't forget to define the correct definition of consciousness, please. (hanging on to what you'll say *sigh* and new recipes)
Like I said - sorry it bothers you so much. And I am sure the sarcasm is good therapy for you. A lot of people use me for that - and that is OK with me.
You missed my point about the definition of "consciousness". There is no "correct definition," but it is important for the purposes of a meaningful discussion to agree to one that means something and differentiates consciousness from lack of consciousness. Otherwise one ends up having conversations such as the one you and marine were having. Woo Woo Word Salad.
How about "aware of one's individual mortality," as a good starting point?
well established definitions of consciousness are:
1. consciousness is a model of reality (Matthews take on Penrose and Hamerhoff)
2. consciousness is thinking (Hofstadter, to some extent Decartes)
3. consciousness is being aware (Farthing)
We asserted in previous forums that the definition is number 1. which leads to number 2 and finally at its most complex stage number 3.
We are not redefining consciousness, at least I was not. We were working on established definitions. Now I want to understand what why you got the impression that we (I believe in another forum) redefined it to the point that it is beyond you.
Going back to madness and religion, which is the topic of this forum. The thing which you perceive to be madness (namely mine or, maybe the mass hysteria that you accuse religion to be) is merely how those who are not aware of fractals perceive the jagged edges of the mountain ranges or the randomness of the trees in the forest are chaos, without rhyme or reason. The reality is, mathematically speaking, there is rhyme and reason for these forms and manifestations.
Fractals has various applications that includes the simulated explosions on Avatar or the breath of fresh air you will take ten years from now. It may even save you from a heart attack so you can brood about the mortality of your body. Fact is you are already participating in immortality by talking to people here. The interface is entering the meme machine. SO when you die, your words, this exchange will live on somewhere in the human collective consciousness.
You cannot understand the point because your model of reality is limited to your model of reality. As for awesomeness...you are awesome, make no mistake. There is no sarcasm there. 99 score with thousands of fans is NOT nothing. it is something. BUT, that does not help your case against the existence of G-d or the validity of religion as an integral part of the evolution of our awareness.
Implying that other people are stupid from one forum to the next just because they have a different perspective is not an argument, it is a sign of somebody who is in the habit of self-persecution. You are awesome, mark.
Wonderfully condescending I will admit. Beyond me? Excellent. LOLOLOL
But - what does my hubpages score have to do with my refusal to believe the garbage that many (including you) swallow?
As usual - you have traveled to semantics and woo woo land and are unable to see that using those 3 definitions renders the term meaningless for a conversation. "consciousness is a model of reality" OK Meaningless woo woo.
I really hate when I am lied to. It insults my intelligence. I would explain - but clearly you would never understand. I have not expressed an opinion as to whether religion is madness. I merely asked one of our religionists if he considered believers to be better than non believers.
well you are refusing to accept well documented definitions just because it insults you that you don't know about them. I am not insulting you, you are.
1. I am a strange loop, douglas hofstadter "brilliant the most gripping 400 pages I've read in years -the times (london)
2. 25 big ideas, the science that's changing the world "Robert matthews has a gift for finding the simple fascinating stories at the heart of concepts transforming the modern world" editor scientific american....and so on and so forth.
Nobody is lying to you. You are just refusing to face the fact that your model of reality needs updating.
Mark, I am not putting you down, I'm illustrating a point. There is no ciao here. For as long as you post something, you are open to hello again.
Aww sweetie pie - you think I haven't read them? LOL So - I don't agree with your critics. LOL
Sorry you are unable to understand what I was saying. I really do hate being lied to though. But - great use of semantics. I am waaaaay impressed. Bet you are a believer.
What a shame you are unable to understand what I said to you.
Oh well. Say some more woo woo.
Maybe some more out-of-context quotes would help? IDK........
well it is very easy to imply that you have a hidden ace you don't care to share. but really calling me a "believer" is minimizing an argument that has nothing to do with beliefs. I am quite certain you haven't read them. Once again, more claims...no support. It's so typical in these forums for wisecracks to spiral down to "i know something but I won't bother" or my sources are better than yours.
It does not help the argument. religion is madness that came from an attempt to make sense of the madness. because it is a product of myth and myth is a product of a reality of consciousness that is personified because it is universal and therefore above being boxed by labels and singular words.
I have mode no contribution to the religion/madness discussion. None.
I do hate being lied to though. I do not believe you that this is not sarcasm:
Still - quote me some more woo woo and pretend that that is what we are talking about.
LOL Semantics is sooooo much easier than having a meaningful conversation.
Woo woo. You have asserted nothing and said nothing. Bet that is not an issue for you in the real world.
Do you hear me?
LOLOLOLOL! ha ha ha...sweetie pie, woowoo, you don't uderstand...abeshabada. That would be my quote. it's you thinking you're saying something.
and this, this is sarcasm.
Great argument mark. goodluck on your next pie hub! wow! 100! and 12,951 smart alecky posts!
you are however right that you made no contribution to the argument.
as i said, i was illustrating a point. if i may spell it out. You cannot say something is worth believing without support. even your awesomeness needs support.
Aww - love the non-sarcasm that you were not displaying and the not putting you down.
As I said when we first began:
Let me know if you change your mind and can stop telling porky pies for a sentence or two.
you realize you're not saying anything at this point other than, you're nonsense, no you are, no you are, no you are....have a stand, other than I hate everyone who has an opinion.
You mean this was supposed to elicit a conversation:
Look in a mirror.
I would love it if you expressed an opinion - but you are just garbling words into meaningless mumbo jumbo and attacking me and then saying you are not attacking me.
As I said - this is not the best place to work out yourself esteem issues and I can probably point you at some one who could help if you would like.
my dear mark, calling you fascinating is not an attack unless you don't think so. my self esteem issues would be a side issue to yours. awesome mark. very intelligent and wise and such a wonderful name to waste on triteness.
have a good day mark. and yes LOL woowoo don't understand sweetie pie, cherry pie, lol again and so on and so forth...
What I fail to comprehend is how a person could prefer to believe in an archetype as a real entity and confuse the two.
my dear, the archetype is a reality, but not a physical one. the underlying reality is non-physical, it is well waves and forces. they are movements and dynamics of essentially nothing. so does that make it less real? no. the physical world is a product of this reality that we personify as archetypes. as campbell puts it "it has not been soiled by the human tongue"
just wish I too had some of their ill gotten gains instead of my own self created from pararnoid low self esteem and quillty psychosis caused majorly by so called christianity
I thought it was cool, but I do a lot of my sentences that way, with several thoughts crammed in, sometimes even opposing other thoughts in the same sentence!
run on is my bad, always. need a forum editor.
myth by definition : metaphor. what its not: john runs like a deer. what it is: john is the deer. G-d is a metaphor for the elementary idea of man.It is a projection of the evolved man, so that evolution will follow that trajectory. as in buddha, jesus etc. religion is the crude map towards it.
Madness that attempts to make sense of madness.
I think this thread is causing psychosis....my eye is twitching after reading it..
by Alan4 years ago
Instead of the wrangling over religion, guilt, sin, hell and eternal retribution, maybe we could turn our thoughts to really hopeful and practical ways of protecting oour society.Let's get positive and...
by pisean2823115 years ago
I know you neither believe in god nor divinity of books...for you religion is man made ...i want to get your views on religion...according to you which religion is most peaceful...which respects not only other faiths...
by vishnu3 years ago
We all worship god and follow the path shown from a religion. I amconfused confused, what is the origin of religion? Which one is the predecessor god or religion? Was god a man or a woman, who started gaining popularity...
by Grace Marguerite Williams4 years ago
What makes people believe in organized religions which upon close introspection, many of its concepts are totally illogical? Is it a combination of fear and /or societal ostracization which...
by Grace Marguerite Williams2 years ago
What makes certain aspects of the feminine fearful, even threatening in organized religions? Why are such religions comfortable with the feminine if it is obedient and submissive to masculine authorities and...
by notloc277 years ago
Does the way people view religion often get in the way of a relationship with Jesus??
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.