Total Posts:72|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Are You Deluded?

Willows
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?
uncung
Posts: 3,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 5:47:53 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

Yes, I am a deluded person.
dee-em
Posts: 6,490
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 6:04:59 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

So, if I confess to a delusion then I am probably not deluded?

I guess I am deluded about being deluded.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 6:35:13 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
Deluded is a strong and loaded term. For a long time I thought Montreal was the capital of Canada - was that a delusion? I would happily admit to have been mistaken about Montreal, but I'd be less happy about being described as being deluded about it.

I probably have many mistaken beliefs, but does that mean I have delusional beliefs? A theist is very likely to say atheists are delusional (and of course vice versa) because 'deluded' has more rhetorical power than saying 'mistaken'. If Dawkins had written 'The god mistake' it might not have sold so well!
Willows
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 8:56:19 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 6:35:13 AM, keithprosser wrote:
Deluded is a strong and loaded term. For a long time I thought Montreal was the capital of Canada - was that a delusion? I would happily admit to have been mistaken about Montreal, but I'd be less happy about being described as being deluded about it.

I probably have many mistaken beliefs, but does that mean I have delusional beliefs? A theist is very likely to say atheists are delusional (and of course vice versa) because 'deluded' has more rhetorical power than saying 'mistaken'. If Dawkins had written 'The god mistake' it might not have sold so well!

Nobody knows everything but the way I understand the definition of delusion is that the belief has to be quirky in the first place and the correct evidence has been clearly and rationally pointed out, which the subject rejects emphatically.

He or she will then defend his or her position by stating irrational excuses for justifying such a quirky belief, for example, religion.
janesix
Posts: 3,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 9:20:55 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

I get called deluded. I am not. I have a belief that isnt accepted reality, in that i know the universe is sending me messages through electronics. Especially numbers, but it also finds youtube videos and websites for me to look at. It wants me to figure something out.
Willows
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 9:29:05 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 9:20:55 AM, janesix wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

I get called deluded. I am not. I have a belief that isnt accepted reality, in that i know the universe is sending me messages through electronics. Especially numbers, but it also finds youtube videos and websites for me to look at. It wants me to figure something out.

With respect, and I am not necessarily saying that being deluded is wrong, but have you not just spelled out the elements of delusion?
1) people tell you and present rational evidence dispelling your belief, but you don't accept it.
2) you have an idiosyncratic belief.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 9:50:32 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 9:29:05 AM, Willows wrote:
With respect, and I am not necessarily saying that being deluded is wrong, but have you not just spelled out the elements of delusion?
1) people tell you and present rational evidence dispelling your belief, but you don't accept it.
2) you have an idiosyncratic belief.

i think being wrong is the essential feature of delusion.
Willows
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 11:04:56 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 9:50:32 AM, keithprosser wrote:
At 11/29/2016 9:29:05 AM, Willows wrote:
With respect, and I am not necessarily saying that being deluded is wrong, but have you not just spelled out the elements of delusion?
1) people tell you and present rational evidence dispelling your belief, but you don't accept it.
2) you have an idiosyncratic belief.

i think being wrong is the essential feature of delusion.

You are wrong.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 11:29:05 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 11:04:56 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/29/2016 9:50:32 AM, keithprosser wrote:
At 11/29/2016 9:29:05 AM, Willows wrote:
With respect, and I am not necessarily saying that being deluded is wrong, but have you not just spelled out the elements of delusion?
1) people tell you and present rational evidence dispelling your belief, but you don't accept it.
2) you have an idiosyncratic belief.

i think being wrong is the essential feature of delusion.

You are wrong.

You mean I am "contradicted by reality or rational argument"?
Willows
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 1:15:25 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 11:29:05 AM, keithprosser wrote:
At 11/29/2016 11:04:56 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/29/2016 9:50:32 AM, keithprosser wrote:
At 11/29/2016 9:29:05 AM, Willows wrote:
With respect, and I am not necessarily saying that being deluded is wrong, but have you not just spelled out the elements of delusion?
1) people tell you and present rational evidence dispelling your belief, but you don't accept it.
2) you have an idiosyncratic belief.

i think being wrong is the essential feature of delusion.

You are wrong.

You mean I am "contradicted by reality or rational argument"?

No, just playing on words.
Deb-8-A-Bull
Posts: 2,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 1:53:00 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

Bammmmmmmm..

I'm going to answer this post twice in my best Robotic voice.
With my arms and head moving like a Robot. OK ready ?
" No I am normal. " , " No I am normal. "
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,396
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 2:11:59 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 11:04:56 AM, Willows wrote:
You are wrong.

Only a deluded mind of an atheist would insist he is right while all believers in God are wrong. The atheist that says evolution is a fact when the fact is officially unproven, proves only the atheist to be deluded. The atheist must acknowledge that either God exists, or He doesn't exist. There is no evidence for suggesting the nonexistence of such divinity, other than saying there is no evidence. The evidence in favor for the existence of God becomes overwhelming to the various cultures to states of informations. The atheist then says this is not proof as no one piece of information becomes proof. Correct. Evidence is not proof. But what proof does the atheist have other than constantly going on the defensive to the tsunamis of informational anomalies in favor for the existence of God? The atheist must then strike back with insults for insolations to protect his mindset from becoming washed ashore from the numerous coincidences of evidences that outnumber the atheist. If the theist can list pages of evidences while the atheist can list only one sentence that says each evidence presented to him is not proof, what does this really prove other than proving the atheist is always on the run, running away as fast as he can say what he cannot see.
Quadrunner
Posts: 1,165
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 4:14:31 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 2:11:59 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/29/2016 11:04:56 AM, Willows wrote:
You are wrong.

Only a deluded mind of an atheist would insist he is right while all believers in God are wrong. The atheist that says evolution is a fact when the fact is officially unproven, proves only the atheist to be deluded. The atheist must acknowledge that either God exists, or He doesn't exist.

No, they only need to believe that he doesn't exist by definition of what they are.

There is no evidence for suggesting the nonexistence of such divinity, other than saying there is no evidence.

Its not delusional to believe something doesn't exist that hasn't been shown to exist. Its irrational.

The evidence in favor for the existence of God becomes overwhelming to the various cultures to states of informations. The atheist then says this is not proof as no one piece of information becomes proof. Correct. Evidence is not proof. But what proof does the atheist have other than constantly going on the defensive to the tsunamis of informational anomalies in favor for the existence of God? The atheist must then strike back with insults for insolations to protect his mindset from becoming washed ashore from the numerous coincidences of evidences that outnumber the atheist. If the theist can list pages of evidences while the atheist can list only one sentence that says each evidence presented to him is not proof, what does this really prove other than proving the atheist is always on the run, running away as fast as he can say what he cannot see.

This is so random. Reminds me of a senile man ranting about the left.
Wisdom is found where the wise seek it.
Quadrunner
Posts: 1,165
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 4:22:29 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

This is a great question to ask. I believe everyone finds out they've remained stubborn in the face of reality at some point in their life. Doesn't ever hurt to admit it, and it doesn't hurt to check yourself in the face of reality. When some things contradict, well, might have a problem there.
Wisdom is found where the wise seek it.
MasonicSlayer
Posts: 2,396
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 4:47:38 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 4:14:31 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 11/29/2016 2:11:59 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/29/2016 11:04:56 AM, Willows wrote:
You are wrong.

Only a deluded mind of an atheist would insist he is right while all believers in God are wrong. The atheist that says evolution is a fact when the fact is officially unproven, proves only the atheist to be deluded. The atheist must acknowledge that either God exists, or He doesn't exist.

No, they only need to believe that he doesn't exist by definition of what they are.

Rephrase this slop. I cannot understand it.

There is no evidence for suggesting the nonexistence of such divinity, other than saying there is no evidence.

Its not delusional to believe something doesn't exist that hasn't been shown to exist. Its irrational.
You are only making an assumption that the existence of God has not been shown. There are tons of evidences and witness accounts to Gods presence. You can only say this does not account for evidence because it is evidence you do not believe. It is still evidence. The only evidence you have is telling people you do not believe their evidence. You have no evidence of your own other than saying no evidence exists. Evidence does exist. You simply refuse to believe it. Prove me wrong. Provide for me one piece of evidence that says God does not exist. All you can say is that you have not seen Him. When I say that I have seen a god, you then say I'm delusional. Yet other people have seen the same god as me. You say we are all delusional. Maybe it is you. You are delusional if you think you have seen everything there is to be seen in the entire Universe. All atheists become delusional to assert an absolute authority to a dertermination to the question of whether God exists or doesn't. The responsible decision for you would be to become Agnostic. You should be of the belief that maybe He exists, and maybe He doesn't, because you cannot be sure at this moment in your life.

The evidence in favor for the existence of God becomes overwhelming to the various cultures to states of informations. The atheist then says this is not proof as no one piece of information becomes proof. Correct. Evidence is not proof. But what proof does the atheist have other than constantly going on the defensive to the tsunamis of informational anomalies in favor for the existence of God? The atheist must then strike back with insults for insolations to protect his mindset from becoming washed ashore from the numerous coincidences of evidences that outnumber the atheist. If the theist can list pages of evidences while the atheist can list only one sentence that says each evidence presented to him is not proof, what does this really prove other than proving the atheist is always on the run, running away as fast as he can say what he cannot see.

This is so random. Reminds me of a senile man ranting about the left.

Let me break it down kindergarten style. Theists has bunches of evidences. The atheist has one evidence that says all the other evidences are not proof. You take one evidence and p,ace it to hundreds of evidences, and you say you won. But the law of coincidences says otherwise. When too many things are seen as a coincidence, it can no longer be seen as a coincidence.
PureX
Posts: 1,533
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 5:03:37 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

The problem is that one man's reality is another man's "delusion".

Theist Bob prays for a good parking spot on his way to work. When he gets one, he assumes that God heard his prayer and answered it. To Bob, this is the "reality" of God.

To atheist Steve, his passenger, who does not believe God exists, the good parking spot is simply a random occurrence and Bob is irrationally choosing to interpret it as evidence of God.

No amount of arguing is going to change Bob's mind, or Steve's. Because each has chosen their reality paradigm and each is interpreting their experience of reality accordingly. And each of them think the other is "deluded".

Bob and Steve both have a choice as to how to deal with this. They can attack each other's reality paradigm in an effort to change the other's mind. Which will almost certainly fail, and end their friendship in the process. Or they can simply respect each other's right to be "wrong", and appreciate the fact that we humans are able to understand our experience of reality so differently.

I, personally, think the solution to the "delusion" problem is humility, and gratitude. Not argument or force.
Willows
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 9:25:43 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 5:03:37 PM, PureX wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

The problem is that one man's reality is another man's "delusion".

Theist Bob prays for a good parking spot on his way to work. When he gets one, he assumes that God heard his prayer and answered it. To Bob, this is the "reality" of God.

To atheist Steve, his passenger, who does not believe God exists, the good parking spot is simply a random occurrence and Bob is irrationally choosing to interpret it as evidence of God.

No amount of arguing is going to change Bob's mind, or Steve's. Because each has chosen their reality paradigm and each is interpreting their experience of reality accordingly. And each of them think the other is "deluded".

Bob and Steve both have a choice as to how to deal with this. They can attack each other's reality paradigm in an effort to change the other's mind. Which will almost certainly fail, and end their friendship in the process. Or they can simply respect each other's right to be "wrong", and appreciate the fact that we humans are able to understand our experience of reality so differently.

I, personally, think the solution to the "delusion" problem is humility, and gratitude. Not argument or force.

Do you not think though that there is a universal reality by which we are able to gauge conditions such as delusion?
Willows
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 9:35:46 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 4:22:29 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?


This is a great question to ask. I believe everyone finds out they've remained stubborn in the face of reality at some point in their life. Doesn't ever hurt to admit it, and it doesn't hurt to check yourself in the face of reality. When some things contradict, well, might have a problem there.

I suppose that one of the pitfalls of this sort of (very basic) self-analysis is that we are all too subjective about ourselves and will always tend to re-define the components of the question in order to obtain a favorable result.
Looncall
Posts: 463
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 9:43:30 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 5:03:37 PM, PureX wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

The problem is that one man's reality is another man's "delusion".

Theist Bob prays for a good parking spot on his way to work. When he gets one, he assumes that God heard his prayer and answered it. To Bob, this is the "reality" of God.

To atheist Steve, his passenger, who does not believe God exists, the good parking spot is simply a random occurrence and Bob is irrationally choosing to interpret it as evidence of God.

No amount of arguing is going to change Bob's mind, or Steve's. Because each has chosen their reality paradigm and each is interpreting their experience of reality accordingly. And each of them think the other is "deluded".

Bob and Steve both have a choice as to how to deal with this. They can attack each other's reality paradigm in an effort to change the other's mind. Which will almost certainly fail, and end their friendship in the process. Or they can simply respect each other's right to be "wrong", and appreciate the fact that we humans are able to understand our experience of reality so differently.

I, personally, think the solution to the "delusion" problem is humility, and gratitude. Not argument or force.

The catch is that religionists cause great harm in acting on their delusions. If they kept them to themselves, one could comfortably ignore them. However, they don't.

For a personal example (I hope my long-time friends here will forgive my telling this again) my late father suffered miserably from Parkinson's Disease. If religionists had not interfered with stem cell research due to their superstitious taboos, he might have received some relief.
The metaphysicist has no laboratory.
Willows
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 9:55:06 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 2:11:59 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/29/2016 11:04:56 AM, Willows wrote:
You are wrong.

Only a deluded mind of an atheist would insist he is right while all believers in God are wrong. The atheist that says evolution is a fact when the fact is officially unproven, proves only the atheist to be deluded. The atheist must acknowledge that either God exists, or He doesn't exist. There is no evidence for suggesting the nonexistence of such divinity, other than saying there is no evidence. The evidence in favor for the existence of God becomes overwhelming to the various cultures to states of informations. The atheist then says this is not proof as no one piece of information becomes proof. Correct. Evidence is not proof. But what proof does the atheist have other than constantly going on the defensive to the tsunamis of informational anomalies in favor for the existence of God? The atheist must then strike back with insults for insolations to protect his mindset from becoming washed ashore from the numerous coincidences of evidences that outnumber the atheist. If the theist can list pages of evidences while the atheist can list only one sentence that says each evidence presented to him is not proof, what does this really prove other than proving the atheist is always on the run, running away as fast as he can say what he cannot see.

All your suppositions here are conditional ("if") as per usual.
I would certainly like to know what these "tsunamis of informational anomalies" are though.
Willows
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 9:57:36 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 1:53:00 PM, Deb-8-A-Bull wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

Bammmmmmmm..

I'm going to answer this post twice in my best Robotic voice.
With my arms and head moving like a Robot. OK ready ?
" No I am normal. " , " No I am normal. "

"Exterminate"," exterminate".
keithprosser
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 10:14:44 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 5:03:37 PM, PureX wrote:

The problem is that one man's reality is another man's "delusion".

Theist Bob prays for a good parking spot on his way to work. When he gets one, he assumes that God heard his prayer and answered it. To Bob, this is the "reality" of God.

To atheist Steve, his passenger, who does not believe God exists, the good parking spot is simply a random occurrence and Bob is irrationally choosing to interpret it as evidence of God.

No amount of arguing is going to change Bob's mind, or Steve's. Because each has chosen their reality paradigm and each is interpreting their experience of reality accordingly. And each of them think the other is "deluded".

I, personally, think the solution to the "delusion" problem is humility, and gratitude. Not argument or force.

Well, if the goal is to minimise strife between car sharers, them that is a good attitude to take. 'Deluded' is a bad word because it has a distinctly derogatory overtone. It is one thing to say to someone 'Pardon me, but I think you may be mistaken' and something quite different to say 'You are totally deluded, man'.

The point is that while Bob is mistaken to think his prayer for a parking space was answered by God, there is no good reason to call him deluded unless you want to start a fight. The solution to the 'delusion' problem is not humility and gratitude, whatever that is supposed to mean. The solution is to avoid deliberatelty inflamatory
language such as 'delusion' and use cool reason to establish the truth, the truth being that anyone who believes in god answers prayers for a parking space is a delusional idiot.
Quadrunner
Posts: 1,165
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 10:24:30 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 4:47:38 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/29/2016 4:14:31 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 11/29/2016 2:11:59 PM, MasonicSlayer wrote:
At 11/29/2016 11:04:56 AM, Willows wrote:
You are wrong.

Only a deluded mind of an atheist would insist he is right while all believers in God are wrong. The atheist that says evolution is a fact when the fact is officially unproven, proves only the atheist to be deluded. The atheist must acknowledge that either God exists, or He doesn't exist.

No, they only need to believe that he doesn't exist by definition of what they are.

Rephrase this slop. I cannot understand it.

There is no evidence for suggesting the nonexistence of such divinity, other than saying there is no evidence.

Its not delusional to believe something doesn't exist that hasn't been shown to exist. Its irrational.
You are only making an assumption that the existence of God has not been shown. There are tons of evidences and witness accounts to Gods presence. You can only say this does not account for evidence because it is evidence you do not believe. It is still evidence. The only evidence you have is telling people you do not believe their evidence. You have no evidence of your own other than saying no evidence exists. Evidence does exist. You simply refuse to believe it. Prove me wrong. Provide for me one piece of evidence that says God does not exist. All you can say is that you have not seen Him. When I say that I have seen a god, you then say I'm delusional. Yet other people have seen the same god as me. You say we are all delusional. Maybe it is you. You are delusional if you think you have seen everything there is to be seen in the entire Universe. All atheists become delusional to assert an absolute authority to a dertermination to the question of whether God exists or doesn't. The responsible decision for you would be to become Agnostic. You should be of the belief that maybe He exists, and maybe He doesn't, because you cannot be sure at this moment in your life.

Well I don't know these people. No evidence has been shown to them for a god's existence and apparently more has been presented to them that one does not, as they claim. I've no reason to doubt that. Everyone has a life of completely different influence.

You have no idea who I am, and you are coming off as a judgmental prick on this end.

The evidence in favor for the existence of God becomes overwhelming to the various cultures to states of informations. The atheist then says this is not proof as no one piece of information becomes proof. Correct. Evidence is not proof. But what proof does the atheist have other than constantly going on the defensive to the tsunamis of informational anomalies in favor for the existence of God? The atheist must then strike back with insults for insolations to protect his mindset from becoming washed ashore from the numerous coincidences of evidences that outnumber the atheist. If the theist can list pages of evidences while the atheist can list only one sentence that says each evidence presented to him is not proof, what does this really prove other than proving the atheist is always on the run, running away as fast as he can say what he cannot see.

This is so random. Reminds me of a senile man ranting about the left.

Let me break it down kindergarten style. Theists has bunches of evidences. The atheist has one evidence that says all the other evidences are not proof. You take one evidence and p,ace it to hundreds of evidences, and you say you won. But the law of coincidences says otherwise. When too many things are seen as a coincidence, it can no longer be seen as a coincidence.

You don't know me nor what I do.
Wisdom is found where the wise seek it.
Quadrunner
Posts: 1,165
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 11:27:01 AM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/30/2016 9:35:46 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/29/2016 4:22:29 PM, Quadrunner wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?


This is a great question to ask. I believe everyone finds out they've remained stubborn in the face of reality at some point in their life. Doesn't ever hurt to admit it, and it doesn't hurt to check yourself in the face of reality. When some things contradict, well, might have a problem there.

I suppose that one of the pitfalls of this sort of (very basic) self-analysis is that we are all too subjective about ourselves and will always tend to re-define the components of the question in order to obtain a favorable result.

This, in effect, is what I've found to be fairly common, or in my humble opinion more likely that people will naturally take the same thought process they've used to form their current stance. Their way of thinking after all, has worked for them up till now. It seems rare that people can come close to empathizing with multiple takes with any degree of reliability without forming close relationship.

When teaching students that have had problems with the initial lesson, after relating to them, I present them with every approach to their problem I can conceive of, every method of rationalization there is, every avenue they could take to finally have the knowledge that's right there click in their head to their way of thinking, and then help them check for inconsistencies from any inevitable errors or holes I've made in my presentation. The more whole the picture the less work in the future as they'll have a more consistent fact sheet to weigh new information against themselves.

One important thing to realize when you are teaching, is that you are presenting information so that it can be learned. Kids make that mistake growing up when they say teach me. No, a student needs to be willing to learn (relate) and then be presented information so they can learn for themselves in an atmosphere conducive to doing so. They can do this entirely themselves if presented common reference in the form of writing. A good teacher provides a guided tour for established thought processes so the willing student will think them with greater ease and efficiency. Its the student that does the heavy lifting though, and that needs to be ensured if your goal is teaching.

Anyway, even if they don't seem to respond favorably, if they have the presentation, unless they compartmentalize or something people can't help but think about it. I wouldn't sweat it if you aren't getting people admitting their faults openly on a debate sight. Personally, I'm just not willing to open up with who I am here and maintain these things in privacy. I think chaos either has a detached belief (not unlikely given that it devalues an essential 'instinct' of humanity) or is more willing then most to open up to direct, uncontrolled criticism of who they are. Chances are when you are speaking thoughtfully it helps someone, or at least I like to think so. Isn't that why we communicate?
Wisdom is found where the wise seek it.
PureX
Posts: 1,533
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 1:22:32 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/30/2016 9:25:43 AM, Willows wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:03:37 PM, PureX wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

The problem is that one man's reality is another man's "delusion".

Theist Bob prays for a good parking spot on his way to work. When he gets one, he assumes that God heard his prayer and answered it. To Bob, this is the "reality" of God.

To atheist Steve, his passenger, who does not believe God exists, the good parking spot is simply a random occurrence and Bob is irrationally choosing to interpret it as evidence of God.

No amount of arguing is going to change Bob's mind, or Steve's. Because each has chosen their reality paradigm and each is interpreting their experience of reality accordingly. And each of them think the other is "deluded".

Bob and Steve both have a choice as to how to deal with this. They can attack each other's reality paradigm in an effort to change the other's mind. Which will almost certainly fail, and end their friendship in the process. Or they can simply respect each other's right to be "wrong", and appreciate the fact that we humans are able to understand our experience of reality so differently.

I, personally, think the solution to the "delusion" problem is humility, and gratitude. Not argument or force.

Do you not think though that there is a universal reality by which we are able to gauge conditions such as delusion?

There is a universal reality, but we humans do not have full or equal access to it. And thinking that we do is the beginning of our delusion.
PureX
Posts: 1,533
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 1:25:45 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/30/2016 9:43:30 AM, Looncall wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:03:37 PM, PureX wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

The problem is that one man's reality is another man's "delusion".

Theist Bob prays for a good parking spot on his way to work. When he gets one, he assumes that God heard his prayer and answered it. To Bob, this is the "reality" of God.

To atheist Steve, his passenger, who does not believe God exists, the good parking spot is simply a random occurrence and Bob is irrationally choosing to interpret it as evidence of God.

No amount of arguing is going to change Bob's mind, or Steve's. Because each has chosen their reality paradigm and each is interpreting their experience of reality accordingly. And each of them think the other is "deluded".

Bob and Steve both have a choice as to how to deal with this. They can attack each other's reality paradigm in an effort to change the other's mind. Which will almost certainly fail, and end their friendship in the process. Or they can simply respect each other's right to be "wrong", and appreciate the fact that we humans are able to understand our experience of reality so differently.

I, personally, think the solution to the "delusion" problem is humility, and gratitude. Not argument or force.

The catch is that religionists cause great harm in acting on their delusions. If they kept them to themselves, one could comfortably ignore them. However, they don't.

For a personal example (I hope my long-time friends here will forgive my telling this again) my late father suffered miserably from Parkinson's Disease. If religionists had not interfered with stem cell research due to their superstitious taboos, he might have received some relief.

It's not our delusions that do the harm. It's insisting that they are NOT delusions, and that the world must then comply. This is not a religious trait. It's a human trait. When you finally let go of your bias against religion, you will see that this is so.
PureX
Posts: 1,533
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 1:33:29 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/30/2016 10:14:44 AM, keithprosser wrote:
At 11/29/2016 5:03:37 PM, PureX wrote:

The problem is that one man's reality is another man's "delusion".

Theist Bob prays for a good parking spot on his way to work. When he gets one, he assumes that God heard his prayer and answered it. To Bob, this is the "reality" of God.

To atheist Steve, his passenger, who does not believe God exists, the good parking spot is simply a random occurrence and Bob is irrationally choosing to interpret it as evidence of God.

No amount of arguing is going to change Bob's mind, or Steve's. Because each has chosen their reality paradigm and each is interpreting their experience of reality accordingly. And each of them think the other is "deluded".

I, personally, think the solution to the "delusion" problem is humility, and gratitude. Not argument or force.

Well, if the goal is to minimise strife between car sharers, them that is a good attitude to take. 'Deluded' is a bad word because it has a distinctly derogatory overtone. It is one thing to say to someone 'Pardon me, but I think you may be mistaken' and something quite different to say 'You are totally deluded, man'.

It's only derogatory if we assume that a human being cannot or should not be "deluded". But in fact, we are ALL deluded to some degree because none of us has full access to a universal reality. We are all inventing it for ourselves from the bits and pieces of it that we have access to.

The point is that while Bob is mistaken to think his prayer for a parking space was answered by God, there is no good reason to call him deluded unless you want to start a fight. The solution to the 'delusion' problem is not humility and gratitude, whatever that is supposed to mean. The solution is to avoid deliberatelty inflamatory
language such as 'delusion' and use cool reason to establish the truth, the truth being that anyone who believes in god answers prayers for a parking space is a delusional idiot.

"Delusion" is the accurate term, because self-delusion is what we are discussing. But we must humble ourselves to see how the subject relates to us. The gratitude comes later, when we reflect on how what appears to be a flaw is actually an asset.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 2:30:02 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/30/2016 1:33:29 PM, PureX wrote:
"Delusion" is the accurate term, because self-delusion is what we are discussing. But we must humble ourselves to see how the subject relates to us. The gratitude comes later, when we reflect on how what appears to be a flaw is actually an asset.

My view is that the word itself is an example of 'passive aggressiveness'. If I call you 'deluded' I can retreat into innocence by claiming it only means I think you are mistaken. But in fact by calling someone 'deluded' one implies a degree of mental instability is involved, an implication that 'mistaken' doesn't carry nearly so much.

If the issue for debate is "Do we all have some mistaken beliefs?", I would say that it would be very surprising if anyone has not got some false 'fact' or other in their memories. I wonder how many people 'know' Sydney is the captial of Australia, for instance. That isn't really worth debating because it's obvious we all have mistaken beliefs. But does that mean we are all deluded?

IMO, it depends on what a delusion is, beyond being a mistaken belief. Precisely, that is. I argue it is has no literal meaning beyond 'mistake', but is used in the same way that people use the word 'Pal' in 'Are you looking at me, Pal?' It's usage is NOT motivated by it's meaning but to signal aggressive intent. If there is no aggressive intent people say 'mistake' or 'error' instead.
ethang5
Posts: 4,117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/30/2016 2:36:06 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 11/29/2016 5:34:56 AM, Willows wrote:
Further to Chaosism's thread http://www.debate.org... , I thought it may be interesting for us all to be a bit introspective for a minute.

Many of us wonder at times if we are deluded in some way. Don't worry, it is quite normal and the fact that you think about it shows that you probably are not deluded or at least, recognise it and are truly on the mend.

But how about those who are deluded and don't know it?

Perhaps an exercise in the form of a simple question to oneself may help but first, what is delusion?

Definition of: delusion
noun
an idiosyncratic belief or impression maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument, typically as a symptom of mental disorder.


Now the question is, do you have an idiosyncratic belief maintained despite being contradicted by reality or rational argument?

Are you sure that is the question? Einstein once had "idiosyncratic beliefs". Today they are the foundations of science. What we consider "idiosyncratic" changes over time. Is being "deluded" time dependent? Was a guy deluded who thought 5000 year ago that the world was round? Will the belief that the universe is totally materialistic be "idiosyncratic" 1,000 years from now?

You entire post is an excuse on which to build a straw-man that posits without support or critical thinking that religious belief is "idiosyncratic" and therefore delusional. It will instantly appeal to the non-religious and poor thinkers.

But if your arguments always seem to have merit only to those who already share your world-view, you probably should re-evaluate them.