Atheists & Agnostics
Related: About this forumUh oh! They're clutching pearls again "over there"
Some silly thread about how those who go to church are less "attached" and "devoted" to guns....or something.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1218&pid=162675
I quipped there must only be so much delusion to divvy up.
Now I'm told that the word "delusion" or "delusional" is extremely hurtful to religionists. "Delusion" is now a pejorative.
They're trying to make me feel guilty (a goal of religion) for using it because apparently it's just like "nigger" or "faggot".
Personally I think it's just because DAWKINS!!!11!1!!!!! used it in the title of his very influential and best selling book.
Anyway.... the Oxford Dictionary defines "delusional" as:
An idiosyncratic belief or impression that is firmly maintained despite being contradicted by what is generally accepted as reality or rational argument,....
Which seems pretty accurate to me when it comes to believing in the supernatural. The definition adds at the end of this general one:
typically a symptom of mental disorder:
(example) "the delusion of being watched"
This apparently is the "problem" with the butt-hurt who are offended. But of course "typical" doesn't mean "acute" or even "every time". But I'd say truly active religion is a neurosis. Not always disabling, but certainly problem causing.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)When will you learn that ANY comment by a nonbeliever to a believer is derogatory?
The sooner you figure that out, the better.
Heddi
(18,312 posts)the distinct LACK of uproar of an untrained, non-medical professional doling out these pearls of wisdom about Atheists...because we're so fucking damaged.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218160045#post78
have met a few folks that seem to need to feel or inflict pain or drama as a surrogate for self-actualization.
I sometimes wonder if some posters on Internet discussion boards share any of the same root dynamics as these folks.
A little research surprised me because I have some experience with people diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder, and treatments of this condition including CBT and DBT.
I was looking up cutting, or "self-harm" because I know it has been deemed a manifestation of a need to feel alive.
Self-harm is listed in the DSM-IV-TR as a symptom of borderline personality disorder.
Bullying has similar features; it's not enough to just live and breath-- there must be drama and pain.
I dunno, just thinking out loud.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218160480#post1
And for the purposes of consistency, I have decided to include atheism and anti-theism as forms of religion or systems of belief.
And accordingly try to be sympathetic. But if engaged in debate, I seldom let their absurd statements go unchallenged.
I learned over the last few years that some number of atheists, hopefully not representative of atheists generally, are really defensive and exhibit many of the same signs we see in cases of child abuse, spousal abuse, and PTSD generally.
These include:
Screaming, shouting, yelling
Exhibit distrust of others
Exhibit emotional outbursts
Have low self-esteem or confidence
Express feelings of hopelessness
Exhibit self-injurious behaviors
Refuse offers of assistance
Be fearful of intimacy and touch
Express self-hate, self-blame, guilt or shame
Have attention and learning disorders
Engage in destructive activities
Learn passive/aggressive behaviors
Agnosticism seems to me to be the most passive and tolerant position to maintain. It takes a strong and confident person to admit that they aren't sure and don't know while not objecting to others' insistence upon a different POV.
I agree with Hannah; "Love" is a really loaded term. I would agree that "respect" or "accept" are better terms us use.
K/R
------
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218160480#post4
At least as they apply to heated and unproductive debates.
No doubt, each group has it's share of legitimate victims of bad treatment.
And, probably, among each group are disruptive types who exhibit the defensive behaviors but were never victims.
My two points are:
Like Islamic terrorists, or overzealous Christian ministers, the most visible or noisiest "representatives" of a belief or non-belief system are decidedly NOT representative of others, and,
Those same noisy ones seem to exhibit behaviors similar to people who have been traumatized.
---------
SO remember--bad if you use the word delusional (which has clincial and non-clinical definitions), Totally okay if you state other posters you interact with have borderline personality disorder and engage in cutting and self-harm (solely clinical terms).
Fucking rank hypocrisy, which is not to be unexpected at this point with certain members of certain groups
onager
(9,356 posts)"It's OK when we do it."
Because we're the Good Guys, fighting those Evil Whatevers. Really, we are! No, you don't need to question that, you fucking cold-hearted Spockian skeptic.
The word policing really pisses me off. And I'm seeing it all over the Internetz these days. As your post shows, people who do that don't really care about "hurt" to others.
It's just an attempt to either derail or shut down the conversation, generally because an opponent is making good points.
It should either be ignored, or openly mocked and laughed at.
Rob H.
(5,351 posts)concentrated in those posts. All that baseless speculation ranks right up up there with Fox News' "Some people are saying...."
LiberalAndProud
(12,799 posts)Persistent delusional disorder is a psychiatric diagnosis, after all.
I don't think I was psychotic when I believed, although I was deluded. We are limited by a dearth of terms that aren't preloaded with all the negative connotations. It makes it impossible to communicate a rational viewpoint without implying offense.
On the other hand, in that forum offense will be taken no matter what you say.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)and your delusion was persistent. So it is difficult to distinguish it from a persistent delusion that is a disorder. The DSM ultimately just concedes that if N people hold a similar persistent delusion, for some value of N, it isn't a disorder.
mr blur
(7,753 posts)According to one persistent poster over there it means that we are homophobic and thus attacking the gay religionistas there.
Gelliebeans
(5,043 posts)For fucks sake someone better get me a list then because the word-police have taken the wheel and we are going off a cliff.
This is silly...it can't be both ways.
Oh wait apparently it can. Ok now things are clicking...I was late to the meeting and didn't get the memo.
Out of all the debates and discussions that might take place we have a problem with use of the word delusional so ALL DISCUSSION IS ENDED.
Seems fair
They're about to set up another straw man with this (intellectually dishonest) salvo:
Since this is the interfaith room criticism of religious belief is not permitted so I ask that no one come in here to argue for the religious people are deluded and mentally ill side. There are other rooms here to argue for that side.
(I hope this is allowed--if not somebody please let me know and I'll edit or self-delete.)
I advised someone recently in a different group to look words up, but as trotsky has pointed out, words there mean what certain people say they mean (and I don't mean Webster, et al.).
Gelliebeans
(5,043 posts)And it allows a shut down of discussion because of said word or words.
Being on DU many years like most of the people that discuss in this forum or the other one have heard this word delusional before in this same context and it is dishonest to say that it has never been discussed in threads and I am quite sure via other means that aren't as public. And NOW the word is an abomination?
What will be the word next week? Delusional or Delusion is NOT a slur. As those other words are noted. It is used to describe a state of being deluded.
Deluded isn't a sacred cow to them because I have obviously deluded myself into thinking we can have a robust discussion without all of these outliers that are beyond the social norms of noted slurs. (homophobic, racist, sexist, ageist vebiage et al.)
bvf
(6,604 posts)I don't give a rat's ass if anyone is offended by being told that, in effect, they hew to complete nonsense. It's obviously easier to feign injury than to argue the point.
Response to AlbertCat (Original post)
Post removed
LostOne4Ever
(9,289 posts)Last edited Tue Dec 9, 2014, 10:28 PM - Edit history (3)
[font style="font-family:papyrus,'Brush Script MT','comic sans MS',fantasy;" size=3 color=teal]Edit: Rest of post deleted to conform to the new group rules of A&A[/font]
bvf
(6,604 posts)I noted an attempt by someone to dismiss all "unapproved" definitions as "colloquial."
Part of it's a game, yes, but a good part of it is ignorant slop.
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)Holier than thou ignorant slop.
It's not like one cannot just look up the definition.
But the words get all kinds of connotations attached to them that the author never meant.
Must come from trying to make sense of ancient stitched together oral tradition texts...
That and other ways of knowing the meaning of things.
bvf
(6,604 posts)A lot of folks spend years being told by figures in authority what words "really" mean in certain contexts.
Control language, and control how people think.
Makes sense.
Gelliebeans
(5,043 posts)Gelliebeans
(5,043 posts)The "new atheism" is some kind of a movement where we all worship on the Internet and have secret handshakes (my embellishment) lol
.....blech
They're watching!