Could believing in creationism be considered a mental disorder?

[Realitycheck]

There is no scientific basis whatsoever to believe in many parts of it, so doesn't this irrational belief system separate people from reality, in a sense?

[Killa Klown]

Kind of, but that doesn't mean they are a threat to society or themselves. Believing in creationism is kind of like one scientest believing in a certain scientific threory and another one disagreeing with the theory. See until one of those scientist can prove the theory right he will not truly be correct. Plus believing in creationism is not really a BAD thing, but kind of a belief, spiritual, and conservatism kind of thing.

[John Cuthber]

"Believing in creationism is kind of like one scientest believing in a certain scientific threory and another one disagreeing with the theory. "

Bollocks! In the end the evidence of further experiments should get the 2 scientists to agreee. That's the whole point of science. The creationists will (and do) continue to believe in their "faith" even after it has ben shown to be, at best, unreliable.

 

Believing in fairy tales is not, directly, a bad thing. But if it leads to killing your neighbour because he eats boiled eggs blunt end first then it's very clearly a bad thing. If we stopped tollerating the myth that "it's OK to believe stuff with no evidence" then at least some of the causes of conflict in society would be addressed. Racism, for example, has just as much scientific validity as creationism. Stamp out the idea that "people should be permitted to believe rubbish if they want" and you get rid of both evils. Of course, I'm not saying that religion is the sole source of trouble in the world, just that it's one of the biggest and that most of the others (nationalism for example) are similar in that they rely on a belief (my God/ my country is better than yours) which is invalid.

[insane_alien]

i honestly don't mind people believing in creationism. if they don't try to force it on everybody else and they don't try to pass it off as science and they don't try to push it into schools then i am completely at peace with them. the moment they cross over that line i can quite easily become hostile though i will usually try and restrain myself.

 

i wouldn't call it a mental disorder on its own. the people who generally try to force it on everybody else certainly seem to be lacking somewhat in the sanity department.

[Phi for All]

I wouldn't say it's a mental disorder but it could be viewed as a kind of disease I suppose. It's like a need to recognize omnipotence in a higher power that explains away what has been observed in favor of what can be accomplished with unlimited power, even if those feats defy reason.

Kind of, but that doesn't mean they are a threat to society or themselves.

They certainly are when they are in a position to dictate what gets taught to our chilodren in public schools.

Believing in creationism is kind of like one scientest believing in a certain scientific threory and another one disagreeing with the theory.

A scientific theory is not like Joe Average saying, "I have this theory...." In science a theory has withstood so much examination and testing over a long period of time that it is practically fact. A good scientist always retains a fraction of a percent of skepticism because a good theory *could* be proven false by it's very definition. You can't falsify most of the creationist claims. God's will just isn't observable.

See until one of those scientist can prove the theory right he will not truly be correct.

Wrong. By the time something is recognized as a theory there is little further "proof" necessary. You're thinking of a hypothesis.

Plus believing in creationism is not really a BAD thing, but kind of a belief, spiritual, and conservatism kind of thing.

Faith and spiritualism aside, creationism IS a bad thing. Evolution doesn't require a god but it doesn't rule one out either. It simply explains a mechanism, one that a higher power certainly could have put it place. Creationism, however, requires that science be wrong about one of the most tested and observed phenomena of all times. I'm a pretty spiritual person myself but creationism is just plain wrong for many reasons so I guess belief in it could be a mental problem. The same way laziness and lack of a desire to learn is a mental disorder.

[swansont]

Faith and spiritualism aside, creationism IS a bad thing.

 

Kinda redundant, though. Creationism isn't about faith and spiritualism. It's about describing material actions based on the ideology that gives the faith and spiritualism. Since it gives the wrong answer, yes, I agree, it's a bad thing.

[Blue Eve]

I would have to say that faith and spiritualism aren't necessarly a bad or a good thing. It depends on the context, just like everything else. I know people that are spiritual, and it's a good thing for them. It improves their sense of hope, gives them something to look forward to when they are going through a miserable time in their lives. They use it as a tool to guide them through life. On the other hand, I've met people that act completely brainwashed by their spiritualism. They except whatever they are told by their church with the attitude that evolution and non spiritual thinking is completely wrong and for no other reason then they were told it was false,etc. So basically, good and bad things can come from faith, spiritualism, religion etc. The topic is too broad to correctly debate. A narrower aspect would be better to review.

 

And now that I read through the posts again, I realize that we aren't talking about faith and spirituality, but about creationism. My bad, oops. Disregard my former post. I agree that creationism is a bad thing. People believing in an idea that can be completely disproven (especially since people believe in it in such great numbers) by science is completely horrible.

[1veedo]

Spiritual != religious. There's a difference.

[Daecon]

Could believing in creationism be considered a mental disorder?

 

Yes. It's called Cognitive dissonance.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

[Glider]

I don't think it is cognitive dissonance (which isn't a mental disorder anyway, it's a mental state of conflict).

 

Cognitive dissonance results from the conflict between two options. If you've ever been shopping and been confronted with two equally good but not identical bits of kit (anybody shopping for something like a laptop will understand this), your indecision is cognitive dissonanace. A more severe version is when, having bought a bit of kit, you see in another shop the same thing at a lower price, or a better thing at the same price. The feeling you get then is cognitive dissonance: you want to believe the thing you bought is the best kit or that you got the best deal, but you know it isn't and you haven't.

 

You could argue that the same applies to creationists. They want to think they bought (into) the best bit of kit, but they 'know' they haven't. The rub here is that they don't know they haven't.

 

Cognitive dissonance is quite strongly aversive and a powerful behavioural drive. In the laptop shopping example, people will often take their original choice back and get the other bit of kit, even if it costs them time, effort and money, just to get rid of the feeling.

 

You don't see many examples of creationists taking their beliefs back and saying "Listen, I'm really sorry to mess you about, but I'd like to exchange this belief for the other one I saw.".

 

I think belief in creationism could be classified as a delusion, where delusion is basically defined as a false belief held in the face of evidence to the contrary. Delusions aren't considered a mental disorder, but they are considered to to be symptoms of a more severe condition (e.g. the delusions of persecution common in schizophrenia).

 

Generally speaking, to be a mental disorder a condition need to be disabling to some degree (i.e. to disrupt normal functioning in a negative way or to render the person unable to function in their society). Most creationists seem to get on fine in their own lives.

 

So, if for no other reason than semantics, I would tend to agree with Richard Dawkins; creationism is a delusion.

[Phi for All]

The two main points that define creationism (at least from where I stand) are the insistence that an all-powerful God MUST have willed everything into existence and simply made it *appear* to be billions of years old, and the insistence that only one of three possible interpretations of the Hebrew word yom be used when translating Genesis.

 

For the former, creationists have no problem believing that their God would resort to trickery and deceit to fool scientists of a later age. They delude themselves into thinking (or have been told so repeatedly by their church) that scientific evidence of evolution means there is no God or that He is not all-powerful if the theory is true.

 

For the latter, I've actually had a discussion with Christian creationists who asked me point-blank, "What don't you understand about the word 'day', it's pretty clear what a 'day' is, isn't it?" When I pointed out that Genesis was written originally in Hebrew where the word yom can also mean "an indeterminate amount of time" I could see that they had deluded themselves into forgetting all about the Hebrew influence in the Bible. Just as many Christians picture the Last Supper the way Da Vinci painted it, at a European table with European tableware, I think much of creationism seeks to strip an undesirable ethnicity from their religion. Is this delusion or racism?

 

In both cases I think much of the delusion is perpetuated by withholding many of the strongest arguments and misrepresenting many of the rest. Can creationism be called delusion when it seems somewhat cleverly and insistently perpetuated by a third party, in this case the creationist churches?

[ParanoiA]

I don't see the sanctity in science, I guess. Couldn't a creationist really just be a skeptic of science? And isn't that useful? Why just accept everything you're told just because of traditional reputation? If we did that, science could incrementally become jaded and sloppy. Seems that you always need a check for balance.

 

Mental disorder? Absolutely not. You can't give anyone the knowledge of where we come from and what started all of this. You get that never ending loop of "what created this in order to create that". And everytime you give me an answer, I ask what came before that. Eventually you can't tell me anything - you speculate or accept the fact that we just don't know. I accept that, but many humans do not and that's well documented. So, either half the world has a mental disorder, or it's fairly natural to fill the "void of the unknown" with stories and lies.

 

Most of the modern creationist stuff I've heard doesn't really conflict too much with science - they just add divinity to the system. That's common for humans to do, so I don't see any mental "disorder" there.

 

Religion and tales of deities are older than science and ultimately, considering the generations of humans that have lived and the hundreds of religions invented, science based belief is outnumbered by creationists. If anything, scientists are the odd balls here.

[Phi for All]

I don't see the sanctity in science, I guess. Couldn't a creationist really just be a skeptic of science? And isn't that useful?

Skepticism *is* healthy and science certainly isn't a fragile, sacred belief that can't withstand scrutiny and criticism. Creationists are not skeptics. They insist on very narrow, literal translations of works penned thousands of years ago. And they prefer the explanation that God simply willed everything into being in a way that makes it appear billions of years old instead of just 6000 years old.

Why just accept everything you're told just because of traditional reputation? If we did that, science could incrementally become jaded and sloppy. Seems that you always need a check for balance.

Scientific skepticism could allow for a higher power behind evolution. Doesn't it make more sense that an omnipotent God would be a patient one as well? Creationists insist on throwing out evolutionary theory because they think it threatens God as a creator. Evolution has nothing to say about how we were created, only how things change over time.

 

Mental disorder? Absolutely not. You can't give anyone the knowledge of where we come from and what started all of this. You get that never ending loop of "what created this in order to create that". And everytime you give me an answer, I ask what came before that. Eventually you can't tell me anything - you speculate or accept the fact that we just don't know. I accept that, but many humans do not and that's well documented. So, either half the world has a mental disorder, or it's fairly natural to fill the "void of the unknown" with stories and lies.

That's why it seems like a mental disorder. No matter how many times you tell a creationist that evolution has nothing to do with creation they insist that it threatens their God. It always creeps back into their arguments.

Most of the modern creationist stuff I've heard doesn't really conflict too much with science - they just add divinity to the system. That's common for humans to do, so I don't see any mental "disorder" there.

You mean except for the parts where evolution is wrong and that God willed the heavens and earth into being in six 24-hour days but planted evidence that discredits that? If they simply added divinity into it I'd have no problems. I actually think it would be much more awesome for God to set everything in motion and then sit back and wait 5 billion years for Its work to produce results.

Religion and tales of deities are older than science and ultimately, considering the generations of humans that have lived and the hundreds of religions invented, science based belief is outnumbered by creationists. If anything, scientists are the odd balls here.

I agree that creationism isn't a mental disorder, but I do think creationists are being deluded by their churches into thinking science is trying to cancel out religion. When science points to *some* creationists claims as being at odds with supported evidence, the creationists delude themselves that *all* their claims are being attacked. There are many religions, even Christian ones, that recognize this as fallacious logic. The Catholic church leaps to mind.

[ParanoiA]

That's why it seems like a mental disorder. No matter how many times you tell a creationist that evolution has nothing to do with creation they insist that it threatens their God. It always creeps back into their arguments.

 

Actually I think that plays more on their fear. Religion's secret weapon has always been about punishment for not believing, or lack of grand reward that "everyone else" will enjoy. I know as a teenager that was the center of my struggle to shake spirituality. Sure, I saw all of the logic of science, but it was scary to actually consider that god might not exist and be a fairy tale - I could pay for eternity. Perhaps, many of these people are driven by that fear.

 

How about mental conditioning? That sounds closer to the truth, to me anyway. When religion is passed onto you by persistent pursuasion, using empathetic techniques to thwart the eventual science and logic showdown each individual will face, it doesn't seem so much like a mental disorder, but good ole brain washing. When they romanticize and warn of the devil and his tactics, folding in the "deniers" (scientists) and so forth, it makes it difficult to penetrate their skulls with sense.

 

You mean except for the parts where evolution is wrong and that God willed the heavens and earth into being in six 24-hour days but planted evidence that discredits that? If they simply added divinity into it I'd have no problems. I actually think it would be much more awesome for God to set everything in motion and then sit back and wait 5 billion years for Its work to produce results.

 

Well, I suppose that's worse than I'm making it out to be, but I guess I don't understand how that conflict really matters. Ok, say god faked it all - that crazy joker - that doesn't change the fact that things "appear" far older and we have to operate within that. Evolution is still valid in that we can make predictions, explain some things about species and so forth - who cares that Bob thinks god invented the process we call evolution and Billy doesn't - that doesn't seem to do anything any different.

 

Of course, I'm sure you can come up with some examples that are damaging, or at least create a negative consequence to further scientific development, and in that case I'd agree

 

I agree that creationism isn't a mental disorder, but I do think creationists are being deluded by their churches into thinking science is trying to cancel out religion.

 

Absolutely. Honestly, I thought the same thing when I first joined this forum. I thought scientists would be on here trying to disprove god. I was pleasantly surprised to find that while scientists tend to be more atheist, they seem to be even more indifferent than anything else. Someone here made the point "science doesn't have anything to say about god". That seems to be true, at least here anyway, no one has attempted to "prove" god doesn't exist, but rather asks for it to be proven. Sounds perfectly responsible to me.

[theCPE]

Creationist are not any different than atheist.

 

Both think they KNOW the what, why, and how of origin of life and existence when in fact there is zero evidence to support either side.

 

Just like there isn't any proof to a benevolent God, there isn't any proof that a God or higher being doesn't exist.

 

How does that saying go......only fools are certain?

 

BTW for people citing religions as majority causes of problems in the world.....

 

Do some research on ancient history, before religions were even established this world was a pretty evil nasty place with people killing etc.....

[ParanoiA]

Just like there isn't any proof to a benevolent God, there isn't any proof that a God or higher being doesn't exist.

 

Good point. Who says he's fair, just, or the ultimate morality barometer? For all we know, he's real, he's mean and cruel and loves to torture humans he's tricked into worshiping him?

 

 

Do some research on ancient history' date=' before religions were even established this world was a pretty evil nasty place with people killing etc.....[/quote']

 

True, but religion has been used to do that more effectively and efficiently. Easier to control people and appease them with hellish standards of living while the elite enjoy luxury.

 

But didn't the egyptians have religion 13,000 years ago? Exactly what particular hominids are you referring to that didn't have religion yet killed each other so viciously and senselessly?

[theCPE]

Good point. Who says he's fair, just, or the ultimate morality barometer? For all we know, he's real, he's mean and cruel and loves to torture humans he's tricked into worshiping him?

 

Or we are minute and insignificant and are like an ant farm to IT.

Or energy manifested itself from nothing and created our universe....

 

 

 

True, but religion has been used to do that more effectively and efficiently. Easier to control people and appease them with hellish standards of living while the elite enjoy luxury.

 

But didn't the egyptians have religion 13,000 years ago? Exactly what particular hominids are you referring to that didn't have religion yet killed each other so viciously and senselessly?

 

I don't disagree at all that organized religion was probably created to control the society and people.

 

However, before organized religions tribes, people, whatever fought and killed just as much.

 

And even today....in our country how many homicides/year are due to religion as compared to jealousy, greed, rage...etc etc....

[Klaynos]

However, before organized religions tribes, people, whatever fought and killed just as much.

 

I'd like to see evidence for this... From a purely academic standpoint...

[Realitycheck]

In ancient times, most religions were devised as ways to appease the gods, gain favor, and achieve more favorable standing. Of course, there was a spectrum involved, from Babylon to Judaism, but the general idea was to gain favor from a god. For the most part, Judaism was the best at including a good set of morals, though most of their story was just invented by later descendants, unless of course, aliens really did build The Temple of Jupiter, but that's another story.

[theCPE]

I'd like to see evidence for this... From a purely academic standpoint...

 

Do you doubt people were killed, maimed, ______ before religion was created?

 

or

 

Do you doubt that people currently are killed, maimed, ______ without religion being involved?

 

Either one is quite silly, but if citations are truly needed you can check any news website for the answer to the later and google can help with the answer to the former.

[Klaynos]

Do you doubt people were killed, maimed, ______ before religion was created?

 

or

 

Do you doubt that people currently are killed, maimed, ______ without religion being involved?

 

Either one is quite silly, but if citations are truly needed you can check any news website for the answer to the later and google can help with the answer to the former.

 

Well the former was what I asked about, as far as i am aware all civilisations we are aware of had some form of organised religion... I just wondered if I missed something...

[1veedo]

For the latter, I've actually had a discussion with Christian creationists who asked me point-blank, "What don't you understand about the word 'day', it's pretty clear what a 'day' is, isn't it?" When I pointed out that Genesis was written originally in Hebrew where the word yom can also mean "an indeterminate amount of time" I could see that they had deluded themselves into forgetting all about the Hebrew influence in the Bible. Just as many Christians picture the Last Supper the way Da Vinci painted it, at a European table with European tableware, I think much of creationism seeks to strip an undesirable ethnicity from their religion. Is this delusion or racism?

This is actually a fairly popular myth. The Hebrew really does mean, quite literally, 6 24-hour days, and not an "indeterminate amount of time." http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c002.html

 

This is known as day-age creationism and is probably one of the funniest types of creationism. The order of how things happened in the Bible is out of order with what we know happened in the first place so these people look completely over this and try to account for an old earth. Just further illustration for how creationists delude themselves. I don't think it counts as a mental disorder though. It's probably more along the lines of wishful thinking.

Both think they KNOW the what, why, and how of origin of life and existence when in fact there is zero evidence to support either side.

You're on scienceforums.net theCPE, not christianforums, so please dont boor us with this stuff.

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/

[Phi for All]

This is actually a fairly popular myth. The Hebrew really does mean, quite literally, 6 24-hour days, and not an "indeterminate amount of time." http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c002.html

And to back this up you use a creationist website?! Really bad form.

 

Try using something written by a Hebrew scholar, or even the TalkOrigins site you cited to theCPE. Hebrew only had about 3000 words at the time Genesis was written. Many words had multiple meanings. I've only seen one reference (the creationist site you mentioned) that claimed a fixed meaning for the word yom when used with numbers. I'll look into it a bit more but I tend to favor TalkOrigins as a source in these matters.

[theCPE]

You're on scienceforums.net theCPE, not christianforums, so please dont boor us with this stuff.

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/

 

1) I didn't bring up the topic of creationism.

 

2) Me pointing out why both creationsim and atheism are in the same boat so calling one a mental disorder is absurd is not a discussion of christianity in any form.

 

3) Don't BORE me with your ineptness.

[swansont]

Religion and tales of deities are older than science and ultimately, considering the generations of humans that have lived and the hundreds of religions invented, science based belief is outnumbered by creationists. If anything, scientists are the odd balls here.

 

That's the bandwagon fallacy, though. Science simply hasn't been around for very long; it isn't a majority vote. There's also a false dilemma, even if the scientific explanation were wrong, it doesn't mean that answers based on religious ideologies are right by default.