How does one distinguish a 'belief' from a delusion?

[razzelflabben]

Do you really think that "God exists and is responsible for creating the universe" and "This thread and forum was created" are anywhere near the same type of claims that carry the same type of evidence?

what does it matter what I believe? The OP question did not say, "convince me of your beliefs" or anything remotely close to that, it asked how we would know...I'm asking the same question of the belief that this thread was created.

I would actually approach a New Agers and Bhuddists, who are atheists with the same criticisms that I apply to your claims. I'm not playing favorites here.

You are not thinking this through.

I don't doubt you twist and misrepresent others, that seems pretty clear to me. It also seems pretty clear to me that you don't know how to be a philosopher, but then again, I only have your posts to testify to me who you are and that isn't reliable when it comes to forming a belief at least that is what the forum rules tell us.

 

[Ronald]

So, you claim that a mind and can exist apart from the body (if not, then clarify how can you know the difference)? What would be the evidence of that?

That's exactly what I am saying. When a person dies, the person composed of mind, emotion, will and spirit does not. The Bible that Christians will go directly to be with the Lord. Some may go to Hades and await judgment and then later be thrown into the Lake of Fire. Believe me, they are very much aware of their lives, sins and they suffer. How do you think they could suffer without a body? Well, that's another teaching.

 

[devolved]

hum...so you don't know anything about voodoo beliefs...http://jamesduvalier.com/history-beliefs-traditions-voodoo-part-haitian-vodou/
In addition, I personally haven't witnessed by my husband has and will testify to what he saw and it is the same as what I am saying...he grew up in Nigeria where the contrast was believers verses Muslims...same phenomena....it's interesting how you make claims you can't back up isn't it?

I did back it up. I've posted a piece of video that actually shows funerals of various cultures that are much more happy than many of the Christian funeral in the US.

and yet I specified other groups as well...interesting how you didn't read those words, how is that reading for comprehension?

Agnostic is not a group separate from Atheism or Theism. Agnostic is a claim of knowledge. Theism or Atheism is claim of belief.

but remember we are looking for common denominator, not can I take and individual and explain something away....oh wait, was that one of the things I said that you didn't read or one that you reinvented? I can't keep track any more.

Yes, we are not merely looking for common denominators, but also for common and likely causal factors. Common denominators are irrelevant if these can't be shown to be likely causes.

Likewise, the mechanics of these causes would need to be explained. If it's some vague and unexplained type of causality, then it's not warranted as explanation.

no, I am saying that atheism as a belief system does not include an afterlife in their belief system

Atheism isn't a belief system. There are plenty of atheists who believe in afterlife in one way or another.

actually this is a false accusation but since that is all this thread seems to be when it comes to things of religious nature, I'm not surprised....you see, I did put forth several things that were measurable and how we would measure. I even gave a checklist for Love which was one of the things we include in that testing for the claims God makes as evidence of Him according to scripture. What did you do with it? Oh, you threw it out because you thought it would be easier to make a claim against a peace that is far beyond our circumstances, right? Lol, you try too hard.

I didn't throw it out. I merely focused on a single claim and methodology. Since I think that your methodology seems to be flawed, it's highly unlikely that it will yield the results that are outside of the false presuppositions that you are making.

I understand that you don't see and don't agree, and that's fine.

 

[Chriliman]

all things the believer can claim and would be mocked for as having a "blind faith" you have to do better than that...

 

[devolved]

That's exactly what I am saying. When a person dies, the person composed of mind, emotion, will and spirit does not. The Bible that Christians will go directly to be with the Lord. Some may go to Hades and await judgment and then later be thrown into the Lake of Fire. Believe me, they are very much aware of their lives, sins and they suffer. How do you think they could suffer without a body? Well, that's another teaching.

What would be the evidence that mind is immaterial part that survives the body?

 

[razzelflabben]

I did back it up. I've posted a piece of video that actually shows funerals of various cultures that are much more happy than any Christian funeral in the US.

hum, you backed up your lack of understanding of voodoo and muslim beliefs about afterlife with videos of various cultures that are more happy than christian funerals in the US when we are talking about peace and not happiness at all.....interesting...nor sure that qualifies, but interesting none the less.

Agnostic is not a group separate from Atheism or Theism. Agnostic is a claim of knowledge. Theism or Atheism is claim of belief.

again, off topic...you really do need to put forth the effort of staying on topic.

Yes, we are not merely looking for common denominators, but also for common and likely causal factors. Common denominators are irrelevant if these can't be shown to be likely causes.

yep...not what I said, but cool, so you don't understand that what we are looking for is both causes and common denominators instead of looking for excuses to believe something else like you are saying here....how did I do? Did I reinvent what you said enough to pass as learning how to do it?

Likewise, the mechanics of these causes would need to be explained. If it's some vague and unexplained type of causality, then it's not warranted as explanation.

it's your burden of proof, but you don't even know what we are looking for, you confused happiness and joy again....now sure how many times you have been told they are not the same.

Atheism isn't a belief system. There are plenty of atheists who believe in afterlife in one way or another.

I won't get off topic, I will however flirt with the flaming line if that is necessary to get you to understand that reinventing what people are saying and ignoring the points they are making is an inflammatory response whether it can be justified by forum rules or not.

I didn't throw it out. I merely focused on a single claim and methodology. Since I think that your methodology seems to be flawed, it's highly unlikely that it will yield the results that are outside of the false presuppositions that you are making.

you don't even give any mechanism at all, much less a methodology or something we can measure....I at least covered all three...come on and show me what I am missing.

I understand that you don't see and don't agree, and that's fine.

Agreement or disagreement has nothing to do with this, I am asking you to show me what you have been claiming I don't understand for way to long so that we can communicate, not agree. You are refusing to do that, why? Why refuse to prove I don't know what I am talking about when you have the perfect opportunity to do so?

 

[razzelflabben]

View attachment 178332

lol....nice...

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

no, no, no, I was told that observation and questioning are not valid mechanisms...come on put some effort in...

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

That said, the mind and brain are intricately integrated. I won't go into how integrate it is because it is beyond my conception or ability to grasp. With a quadrillion connections, the brain is complex to say the least.

Why not just answer the question?

Right, they found a way to shut the door, stop the person's ability to function, disconnect the mind from the brain if you will.

So why does the mind - which you say isn't dependent on the brain - not continue when the brain is anaesthetized?

 

[devolved]

no, I am saying that atheism as a belief system does not include an afterlife in their belief system

Atheism isn't a belief system. There are plenty of atheists who believe in afterlife in one way or another.

I won't get off topic, I will however flirt with the flaming line if that is necessary to get you to understand that reinventing what people are saying and ignoring the points they are making is an inflammatory response whether it can be justified by forum rules or not.

I'm not sure what else to say here.

I try to correct your statements that are objectively wrong, and you keep viewing that as inflammatory and misrepresenting of what you've said. I'm actually copy/pasting the discussion above. How is that any of that?

1) You seem to misunderstand what atheism is as you labeled it a "belief system", which it is not.
2) You mistakenly think that there are no atheists who believe in the afterlife.

Both of these are demonstrably false. I'm not sure what else to say, or how to come about discussing anything with you when your mode of discussion seems to be rather abrasive in nature... hence I'll just leave it here.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

I'm not sure what else to say, or how to come about discussing anything with you when your mode of discussion seems to be rather abrasive in nature... hence I'll just leave it here.

I think at this point it's best just to let this person have their erroneous view and not comment on it. Page after page of not getting through to them seems mostly pointless, although it's providing me with good material to show to others regarding how logical arguments fall apart.

 

[razzelflabben]

I'm not sure what else to say here.

I try to correct your statements that are objectively wrong, and you keep viewing that as inflammatory and misrepresenting of what you've said. I'm actually copy/pasting the discussion above. How is that any of that?

well, since I did NOT say I was objectively right, it would be kind of hard for you to correct my when I said something I didn't say and don't believe, now wouldn't it? See, the problem with reinventing what others say is that it makes you just look like you have not clue what you are saying. You pretend to look wise but in reality, anyone reading for comprehension sees that you look otherwise in your statements.

Hum...now you want me to believe that by saying I will not talk about atheist beliefs because they are off topic, what I am really saying is, "what I believe is objectively right" That is about as crazy as any reinvention I have seen so far.

1) You seem to misunderstand what atheism is as you labeled it a "belief system", which it is not.
2) You mistakenly think that there are no atheists who believe in the afterlife.

I didn't say either of those things, I did say that I have included in the observations atheists that don't believe in an afterlife as most of the atheists I have talked to agree that there is none...thus the comment about belief system...but hey, delusions are hard to argue with at least that is one thing we can learn from your posts.

Both of these are demonstrably false. I'm not sure what else to say, or how to come about discussing anything with you when your mode of discussion seems to be rather abrasive in nature... hence I'll just leave it here.

lol...spoken like a true philosopher, wait, that isn't how a philosopher would argue...I'm sorry, I confused your post with someone else apparently, my bad....

Now, are you ready to play nice with me in this discussion or not? I think I have proved I can be as nasty as you have been, but it goes against everything I am at the core, so what is it, we discuss nicely with fair exchange or more of this non sense you asked me to give you?

 

[razzelflabben]

I think at this point it's best just to let this person have their erroneous view and not comment on it. Page after page of not getting through to them seems mostly pointless, although it's providing me with good material to show to others regarding how logical arguments fall apart.

lol...don't like it when you get what you give?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I think at this point it's best just to let this person have their erroneous view and not comment on it. Page after page of not getting through to them seems mostly pointless, although it's providing me with good material to show to others regarding how logical arguments fall apart.

It happens occasionally, although this is a doozy. There's not much you can do really. I'm curious to know how the mods would respond if your posts were reported for flaming or slander or whatever nonsense...

 

[devolved]

I understand what you're talking about, and I don't disagree with you.

I can't speak to what is going on in every other Christian's life in regard to their own faith, but I can speak for myself.

I wish I was better, and I know the example and commands of Jesus are worth striving for, even when I fall short.

Sure, I think a lot of it can be worthwhile, if we don't take it as an "all or nothing" type of religious monolithic belief that tends to dominate the fundamentalist churches today.

I don't disagree that a certain perspective and execution of Christian ideals as an existential philosophy can be beneficial for those who may see need in that. So I wouldn't take anything away from individuals who existentially pursue the higher bar ideals that I would see value in.

I don't think it's an accurate example, but it's a relevant one.

I'm not really a follower of NLP, but I've heard a story from Richard Bandler about his alternative methods about dealing with mental illness. He described a case where a guy was locked up in psychiatry clinic because he would see Satan everywhere and it terrified him.

So, Bandler tried something. He got a camera and a projector and some smoke machines, and projected an image outside of the window of him dressed up as a Satan. And he said to the guy that he'll leave him alone if, and only if he will follow every word of the book that he will leave on his table. That he must study it and follow every rule.

And he left a sales manual to some commission-based sales company. The story goes that the guy got better and became the top salesman in that company. I don't know if the story is true or not, but if it is... I do see value in Bandler's technique, even though it's a form of replacing one delusion with other one.

I'm not claiming certainty in knowing that Christianity is a delusion, but if it is... I'd rather for it's practitioners demonstrate the positive traits of such false belief, in which case it would be much more justifiable than abrasive rhetoric that tends to follow the lines of Christian fundamentalism.

 

[razzelflabben]

Sure, I think a lot of it can be worthwhile, if we don't take it as an "all or nothing" type of religious monolithic belief that tends to dominate the fundamentalist churches today.

I don't disagree that a certain perspective and execution of Christian ideals as an existential philosophy can be beneficial for those who may see need in that. So I wouldn't take anything away from individuals who existentially pursue the higher bar ideals that I would see value in.

I don't think it's an accurate example, but it's a relevant one.

I'm not really a follower of NLP, but I've heard a story from Richard Bandler about his alternative methods about dealing with mental illness. He described a case where a guy was locked up in psychiatry clinic because he would see Satan everywhere and it terrified him.

So, Bandler tried something. He got a camera and a projector and some smoke machines, and projected an image outside of the window of him dressed up as a Satan. And he said to the guy that he'll leave him alone if, and only if he will follow every word of the book that he will leave on his table. That he must study it and follow every rule.

And he left a sales manual to some commission-based sales company. The story goes that the guy got better and became the top salesman in that company. I don't know if the story is true or not, but if it is... I do see value in Bandler's technique, even though it's a form of replacing one delusion with other one.

I'm not claiming that Christianity is a delusion, but if it is... I'd rather for it's practitioners demonstrate the positive traits of such false belief, in which case it would be much more justifiable than abrasive rhetoric that tends to follow the lines of Christian fundamentalism.

agreed, but the op question is about how to know if it is delusion or truth not how we would feel if it was either one

 

[amariselle]

Sure, I think a lot of it can be worthwhile, if we don't take it as an "all or nothing" type of religious monolithic belief that tends to dominate the fundamentalist churches today.

I don't disagree that a certain perspective and execution of Christian ideals as an existential philosophy can be beneficial for those who may see need in that. So I wouldn't take anything away from individuals who existentially pursue the higher bar ideals that I would see value in.

I don't think it's an accurate example, but it's a relevant one.

I'm not really a follower of NLP, but I've heard a story from Richard Bandler about his alternative methods about dealing with mental illness. He described a case where a guy was locked up in psychiatry clinic because he would see Satan everywhere and it terrified him.

So, Bandler tried something. He got a camera and a projector and some smoke machines, and projected an image outside of the window of him dressed up as a Satan. And he said to the guy that he'll leave him alone if, and only if he will follow every word of the book that he will leave on his table. That he must study it and follow every rule.

And he left a sales manual to some commission-based sales company. The story goes that the guy got better and became the top salesman in that company. I don't know if the story is true or not, but if it is... I do see value in Bandler's technique, even though it's a form of replacing one delusion with other one.

I'm not claiming certainty in knowing that Christianity is a delusion, but if it is... I'd rather for it's practitioners demonstrate the positive traits of such false belief, in which case it would be much more justifiable than abrasive rhetoric that tends to follow the lines of Christian fundamentalism.

I agree with you in regard to "abrasive rhetoric." I too have a problem with Christians who conduct themselves in such a way.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

lol...don't like it when you get what you give?

No, I don't like wasting time trying to correct someone who I'm not able to reach.

 

[razzelflabben]

No, I don't like wasting time trying to correct someone who I'm not able to reach.

and you really think you can reach anyone by reinventing what they say and then demand they defend the argument you wanted them to make...interesting..I have found that a better way to reach someone is patience and kindness and civil discord all the whole being gentle and fair in responses, all of which I have tried to do and none of which I have received back.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

and you really think you can reach anyone by reinventing what they say and then demand they defend the argument you wanted them to make...interesting..I have found that a better way to reach someone is patience and kindness and civil discord all the whole being gentle and fair in responses, all of which I have tried to do and none of which I have received back.

Kindness and civil discord? You've called posters insane and their arguments stupid.