A Christian goes to see a Psychiatrist for a Diagnosis

[HAL]

The delusion of the average Christian does not impair his functioning. Once it harms himself or others, it is an illness and treatable.

I would also add that I think the other explanation is that a person who claims they are a Christian could just simply be lying. They might very well do this because it's too stressful to say otherwise and be rejected by their peers. This type of faux "Christian" would be harmless - just wanting to get by without any hassles from family and friends.

Who knows how many are out there? But with the "experts" claiming they can't even be admitted for therapy as a delusional theist because they are considered "normal" we're stuck again. Maybe this type of lying Christian could be talked out of it? If all Christians as a group were to be called delusional by the ex - spurts many of this type might very well begin to claim they aren't Christians because they don't want that label.

I just wish the experts would grow a pair and do the right thing.

[12 Monkeys]

 Anyone who ACTUALLY followed the instructions on how to live that is credited as Christ's teaching would most certianly be institutionilized. Give away your possesions,love your enemy,disown your family.......etc..

[Gnu Ordure]

Mainly cause the atheist is smart enough to duck, while the Christian is praying for god to stop the dart....

I sure hope Gnu smited you on accident, because this post is hilarious.

Why would I applaud someone for making me inhale coffee? That would be insane.

That was my first negative Darwin point ever. I suppose I deserved it.

Too right. I still have nightmares of drowning in an ocean of coffee. Iced coffee, obviously, with the ice-cubes becoming ice-bergs. Sometimes there's a ship going down, but Kate Winslet is conspicuous by her absence. 

I may need to go back into therapy.

But I am a reasonable man, Nogods. After receiving many polite PMs from your legions of fans (and several death threats), my smite turns out to be a merely temporary blemish on the purity of your Darwin record.

Let this be a lesson to you.

And me.

[nogodsforme]

How dare you reveal that I have lesions? That's the kind of nasty rumor that I would expect of herbivorous animals such as you, you gnu you. And you don't even look gnu-ish. I'll bet you are just passing as a gnu to get special benefits from the global gnu-ish banking conspiracy.

You keep up saying crap like that about me and my lesions, and you are going to ruin my chances with magic miles and Alzael, not to mention Robert Downey Jr, Edward Norton, and Benedict Cumberbatch. And Thor.

Oh. Legions. Never mind. 

[Gnu Ordure]

I imagine that the Heaven's Gate members who killed themselves were delusional for a variety of reasons. But specifying those reasons in each case is somewhat difficult.
...

Basically, that's a 'don't know', isn't it? So make of it what you will.

Here's what I make of it. I asked you because I wanted to compare the reasons, your opinions, as to why you thought Heaven's Gate ^Wiki (H.G.) members were delusional (you thought they were) with the reasons some of us including Marshall Brain, Dr. Dawkins, Graybeard, azdgari, bertaberts, Dr. Freud, et. al. think Christians are delusional.

OK.

But I'm starting to think that I'm misunderstanding your question. If you ask me, Why do you think that person has flu?, there are two viable answers:

1. I think he has flu because he inhaled a flu virus (etiology).

2. I think he has flu because I can see detect a runny nose, a headache, pain in the joints and an abnormal temperature (diagnosis).

Perhaps you could clarify which you mean.

I was very disappointed (but not surprised) with Mooby because as I said he played a wild card to get out of answering the question. He basically said that... etc etc

I can't answer for Mooby.

They believed that after they died their souls would be transported to a UFO trailing the comet Hale-Bopp, which to me is just as delusional as a Christian saying they will go to a magical placed called "heaven". I see no difference whatsoever.

Numbers. That's the difference.

I just wish the experts would grow a pair and do the right thing.

According to Bert's figures, 83% of psychiatrists are theists. So those 83% aren't going to be classifying themselves as delusional anytime soon.

And the other 17% are in no position to impose their view. They don't have the numbers to change the rules; and if they break the current rules they'll lose their jobs.

So I'm not going to be referring any of my christian patients for psychiatric diagnosis anytime soon.

If you think I'm a coward for not pointlessly throwing away my career, so be it.

[HAL]

But I'm starting to think that I'm misunderstanding your question. If you ask me, Why do you think that person has flu?, there are two viable answers:

1. I think he has flu because he inhaled a flu virus (etiology).

2. I think he has flu because I can see detect a runny nose, a headache, pain in the joints and an abnormal temperature (diagnosis).

Perhaps you could clarify which you mean.

I don't 'understand how to apply that analogy to this discussion.

They believed that after they died their souls would be transported to a UFO trailing the comet Hale-Bopp, which to me is just as delusional as a Christian saying they will go to a magical placed called "heaven". I see no difference whatsoever.

Numbers. That's the difference.

And IMHO, that's a stupid reason. Sorry for the harsh word, but that's what it amounts to. We're not going to agree on this.

I just wish the experts would grow a pair and do the right thing.

According to Bert's figures, 83% of psychiatrists are theists. So those 83% aren't going to be classifying themselves as delusional anytime soon.

So a group of delusional people don't want to call themselves delusional?

Wow, that's a shocking revelation. I'm stunned.

xx% of Catholic priests are child molesters, So those xx% aren't going to be classifying themselves as child molesters anytime soon.

And the other 17% are in no position to impose their view. They don't have the numbers to change the rules; and if they break the current rules they'll lose their jobs. So I'm not going to be referring any of my christian patients for psychiatric diagnosis anytime soon. If you think I'm a coward for not pointlessly throwing away my career, so be it.

Unfortunately that's just an appeal to popularity. That's a fallacy as you know. But I'll state it for those who don't know. The amount of people who say something is true does not make it so. And that applies to experts just as well as any other group. I don't have to tell you how many groups of experts throughout history have been wrong, and this is just another example. Also, stating you wouldn't risk your career calling a Christian delusional does not make it right either. I understand why you wouldn't, but that doesn't make it right to not call them delusional. So I reject all the reasons you just listed.

The sole reason to call them delusional is if they met the definition of delusional, one that doesn't include the stupid get out of jail free card escape clause we've already discussed. The experts are wrong to include that escape clause and I'm in very good company saying that.

But,

shouldn't you call Christians delusional in a group of your peers (not in your practice) here?

On a forum.

Where you won't get in trouble?

What's stopping you from doing it here?

[Gnu Ordure]

But I'm starting to think that I'm misunderstanding your question. If you ask me, Why do you think that person has flu?, there are two viable answers:

1. I think he has flu because he inhaled a flu virus (etiology).

2. I think he has flu because I can see detect a runny nose, a headache, pain in the joints and an abnormal temperature (diagnosis).

Perhaps you could clarify which you mean.

I don't 'understand how to apply that analogy to this discussion.

What I'm saying is that the question, Why do you think that person is delusional?, is ambiguous. It could mean either, What do you think are the causes of that person's delusions?, or it could mean, What are your grounds for diagnosing that person as delusional?

Numbers. That's the difference.

And IMHO, that's a stupid reason. Sorry for the harsh word, but that's what it amounts to. We're not going to agree on this.

OK. I'm just telling you how the system works. You're not obliged to like it.

According to Bert's figures, 83% of psychiatrists are theists. So those 83% aren't going to be classifying themselves as delusional anytime soon.

So a group of delusional people don't want to call themselves delusional? Wow, that's a shocking revelation. I'm stunned. xx% of Catholic priests are child molesters, So those xx% aren't going to be classifying themselves as child molesters anytime soon.

There's a crucial difference, HAL. The statement, I am a child-molester is a meaningful sentence.

Whereas the statement, I am deluded is a paradox - because deluded people don't know they are deluded, by definition.

Therefore, theist psychiatrists aren't going to declare themselves deluded.

And the other 17% are in no position to impose their view. They don't have the numbers to change the rules; and if they break the current rules they'll lose their jobs. So I'm not going to be referring any of my christian patients for psychiatric diagnosis anytime soon. If you think I'm a coward for not pointlessly throwing away my career, so be it.

Unfortunately that's just an appeal to popularity.

No, it isn't - I'm explaining how the minority non-theist psychiatrists behave pragmatically in the current situation. 

Also, stating you wouldn't risk your career calling a Christian delusional does not make it right either. I understand why you wouldn't, but that doesn't make it right to not call them delusional.

Perhaps. But I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

shouldn't you call Christians delusional in a group of your peers (not in your practice) here? On a forum. Where you won't get in trouble? What's stopping you from doing it here?

Nothing, except that it's not relevant to the topic. You asked how the medical profession deals with normal theists, and that's what I'm trying to explain, with my professional hat on. 

[HAL]

Also, stating you wouldn't risk your career calling a Christian delusional does not make it right either. I understand why you wouldn't, but that doesn't make it right to not call them delusional.

Perhaps. But I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.

I think we're done here - except to say maybe you should lose some sleep over it from time to time.