Article on Atheism as a Mental Illness

[Ixion]

Well, I was surfing the internet (as I happen to do quite a bit), and noticed an article that caught my attention. The title of the article is "Atheism is a Mental Illness, a cry for attention". I noticed that the author is bwinwright, who posts here a bit, and admits as such in the article.

Atheism is a Mental Illness (http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/3379447-atheism-is-a-mental-illness-a-cry-for-attention)

His premise is (paraphrasing): atheists are protesting organised religion. They cannot possibly deny that an intelligent being created the universe. Order requires an intelligent being.

He never really addresses how he came to the conclusion that being an atheist infers that one must have a mental illness. The article revolves around a big straw man to support his beliefs as well. Too bad. Maybe someone else has another take on it.

[MG1962]

Fantastic, another round of stick poking to deal with :(

[pchams]

Nope. Insanity.
As described by the majority of social norms.

Social norms ignore reality, naturally.

[arthwollipot]

I read this all prepared to throw something. I even had a soft thing ready to throw so that I didn't damage anything. But after reading it I could only laugh. My 13-year old son could write better.

[Hokulele]

Fantastic, another round of stick poking to deal with :(


Too true. It is such a shame that some theists feel a constant need to publically poke people who may not share their beliefs with sticks.

[Aepervius]

Starting with wrong premise, coming to the wrong conclusion, GIGO. I read it and could only laugh too. *shrug* there will always be a few theist which NEED to justify their belief by attacking the non-belief of others. Fox in da hole. Insane atheist for not believing. Close minded atheist for not seeing the truth and evidence of God's existence. Etc... Etc... I have yet to read a real article which make a good point on that, instead of building their own strawman.

[arthwollipot]

It wasn't the strawman that made me laugh. It was the fact that it reads as though it was written by a thirteen year old.

[MG1962]

Too true. It is such a shame that some theists feel a constant need to publically poke people who may not share their beliefs with sticks.

Yup - and the people being poked find a stick and poke back, and the whole thing just trundles along

Even as a thesist I wonder how many athiests we are actually responsible for creating by this behaviour

[RandFan]

So, if you find yourself in a duel with an atheist, you can not lose. Just remain calm and stick to your guns. Generally, if you simply hold their feet to the fire and stick to this one point, the atheist will resort to name calling and quit first. It's like throwing holy water on Satan. It's fun!
Lying for Jesus.

[Hokulele]

Yup - and the people being poked find a stick and poke back, and the whole thing just trundles along.


Some people find a stick, some accrue a shield bonus.

Even as a theist I wonder how many atheists we are actually responsible for creating by this behaviour


Dickery rarely results in charisma points.

[CaptainManacles]

article? Rambling idiot rambles on the internet, posts it on a site with no editorial oversight. Woopity do.

[HansMustermann]

Lying for Jesus.

Actually, it sounds to me more like "if you're one track minded and repeat the same stupidity a thousand and one times, the other will eventually quit the pointless thing and move on. Then you can act as if you were right and proved yourself right."

Plus, if it's bwinwright, see his post yesterday to the effect of "some woowoo said he proved evolution is dead, therefore atheism is dead too." It's not even for Jesus, it's for his own flavour of woowoo new-age pantheism. It's the guy who thought that if Einstein tried to make a unified field theory and failed, it's somehow proof of a cosmic consciousness.

Honestly, he seems more like the kind of guy who makes fundie Jesus theists seem sane and smart by comparison.

[slingblade]

Dickery rarely results in charisma points.

No, but by George, I could use some rousing dickery right about now! :p

As could we all!

[LostAngeles]

I sometimes like visiting the James Randi Educational Foundation website just to duel with atheists.

How did we miss that one? I wonder if s/he comes to the forum or just posts to comments?

[Hokulele]

No, but by George, I could use some rousing dickery right about now! :p


Sorry, I am tempermentally and physically unable to help. ;)

How did we miss that one? I wonder if s/he comes to the forum or just posts to comments?


How could you possibly miss it?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4838986#post4838986

[lionking]

article? Rambling idiot rambles on the internet, posts it on a site with no editorial oversight. Woopity do.
Beat me to it. If that's an article, then I produce Pulitzer Prize-winning material.

[LostAngeles]

How could you possibly miss it?

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4838986#post4838986

I hadn't! I just never took note of the name!

Post and runner? PFFT. **** 'em. Let us know when you stick around for a debate, bwinright.

[Evolved Wookie]

...who may not share their beliefs with sticks.

But belief with sticks is the best sort of belief! Have you ever tried believing without sticks? People think you're mad!

I admit that I haven't read the article linked by the OP yet, because I already have a mental illness to contend with and I don't want to learn that my atheism is another one... :rolleyes:

...wait...is that the reason, or is it because I don't want to have to pay work for a new monitor...?

[MRC_Hans]

Quote:
I sometimes like visiting the James Randi Educational Foundation website just to duel with atheists.



Mmmm, strange style of duelling: Drop a heap of garbage on the scene and abandon it.

Oh, well......

Hans

[arthwollipot]

Mmmm, strange style of duelling: Drop a heap of garbage on the scene and abandon it.And here's me with my rapier, and no-one to skewer.

[Dancing David]

!@#%^&*&$@#$%*

abuse of the term mental illness!


I know Richard Dawkins started it, which makes him wrong in his use of the word delusion as well.

[mazyloron]

Fantastic, another round of stick poking to deal with :(

Just like a theist to bring a stick to a gun fight.

[mazyloron]

Dickery rarely results in charisma points.

Done right, it most certainly does.



...or, so I've heard.

[Dave Rogers]

I ask them to give me a single example of anything, outside of what they call nature, that came into being without intelligent direction. Of course, they can not. Everything manufactured by man required intelligent direction, right? Of course.


This is some of the finest circular logic I've seen outside the Conspiracy Theories sub-forum.

(Of course, bwinwright posts there too. Guess what his position is.)

Dave

[Gord_in_Toronto]

As I have said in the past, there is circumstantial evidence that Mr "bwinwright" is actually John P Boatwright:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4074321&highlight=boatwright#post4074321

who has trolled Usenet for decades.

If you do a search in Google Groups for him, you will see that in thousands of postings he has learned nothing about anything that has a basis in reality.


IMHO YMMV & etc. ;)

[mazyloron]

OK, wow. I stopped the snark for a moment to read that, and...yeah, bwinwright has got to be in middle school or something. That read like an 8th-grade book report.

[brookus]

I ask them to give me a single example of anything, outside of what they call nature, that came into being without intelligent direction.

This article. What do I win?

[mazyloron]

This article. What do I win?

:D

[Twiler]

As I have said in the past, there is circumstantial evidence that Mr "bwinwright" is actually John P Boatwright:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4074321&highlight=boatwright#post4074321

who has trolled Usenet for decades.

If you do a search in Google Groups for him, you will see that in thousands of postings he has learned nothing about anything that has a basis in reality.


IMHO YMMV & etc. ;)

Ah, he's the Boatwright mentioned in example 22 here?

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

[mikeyx]

Well, I was surfing the internet (as I happen to do quite a bit), and noticed an article that caught my attention. The title of the article is "Atheism is a Mental Illness, a cry for attention". I noticed that the author is bwinwright, who posts here a bit, and admits as such in the article.

Atheism is a Mental Illness (http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/3379447-atheism-is-a-mental-illness-a-cry-for-attention)

His premise is (paraphrasing): atheists are protesting organised religion. They cannot possibly deny that an intelligent being created the universe. Order requires an intelligent being.

He never really addresses how he came to the conclusion that being an atheist infers that one must have a mental illness. The article revolves around a big straw man to support his beliefs as well. Too bad. Maybe someone else has another take on it.

I'm raised potestant and am a sufi of sorts, thus a non-atheistics and I have plenty of issues with organized religion myself.

Faith is faith

organized religion is about control and indoctrination.

[mikeyx]

Lying for Jesus.

thou shalt no bear false what?

[Beerina]

bwinwright's a semi-regular around here, FWIW.

[P.J. Denyer]

if you simply hold their feet to the fire

This was long a favoured debating technique of certain branches ot the Catholic church. I thought it was illegal now though.

[Fnord]

Yup - and the people being poked find a stick and poke back, and the whole thing just trundles along

Even as a thesist I wonder how many athiests we are actually responsible for creating by this behaviour

Probably not quite as many as are people simply driven away from any form of organized religion or "fellowship of believers."

There seems to be not quite as much correlation between Atheism and insanity as there is between Religionism and insanity. My guess is that most of the "Voices" religionists hear are those originating in their own schizophrenic heads.

Of course, I am no expert on mental health issues.

[shadron]

I hadn't! I just never took note of the name!

Post and runner? PFFT. **** 'em. Let us know when you stick around for a debate, bwinright.

Debate? No. bwinwright's entire argument, analysis, riposte and final thoughts are contained in the few paragraphs he wrote in that OP; there is nothing in the 10x words added on in response to others that explains or further extends his argument. It's all there, all you'll ever get. It's not a debate, it's simply his opinion. As he says in the last paragraph, "all you have to do is stick to your guns". He does do that.

And that's it. He's right, everyone else who disagrees is mentally ill and needs condescension, not argument, god tells him so and there is no point in carrying on except to allow him to believe that he's "hit a nerve". I think I responded to his last thread here, but I don't think I'll do it again.

[Fnord]

thou shalt no bear false what?

It has been argued that this applies only to fellow believers, and not to the "unsaved" like Atheists, Jews, Muslims, et cetera. Thus, many Christians seem to feel that the Commandments do not apply when dealing with non-Christians. This also seems especially evident in inter-denominational relationships, where (for example) some Muslims and Roman Catholics display no remorse for openly insulting Reformists.

This does little to bring people into the Church, and even drives away those who don't agree with 100% of Church doctrine.

[Dave Rogers]

This article. What do I win?

The thread.

Dave

[Bob Klase]

bwinwright and his site are also being discussed here

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=146334

Pretty much a duplicate thread to this one.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Ah, he's the Boatwright mentioned in example 22 here?

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm


That sounds like him. ;)

[Ixion]

article? Rambling idiot rambles on the internet, posts it on a site with no editorial oversight. Woopity do.

I, as a generalization, refer to posts on the internet which are presented as a singular point of view on a subject as an article. In this case, my use of the term was probably misleading.

[bobcarp]

so is he say Einstein, Hawking, Sagan, et al, were mentaly ill?

[slingblade]

Anyone who doesn't believe in sky-daddy or magic is mentally ill. Didn't you know? :p

[Pardalis]

Anyone who doesn't believe in sky-daddy or magic is mentally ill. Didn't you know? :p

Let's see: denying reality, talking to yourself, referring to the same old texts over and over, collective indoctrination through fear, strange rituals, seeing things that are not there...

Does this describe atheists or theists? :eusa_think:

[slingblade]

Let's see: denying reality, talking to yourself, referring to the same old texts over and over, collective indoctrination through fear, strange rituals, seeing things that are not there...

Does this describe atheists or theists? :eusa_think:


Hmmm....gee, that's a real poser.



:p

[Safe-Keeper]

so is he say Einstein, Hawking, Sagan, et al, were mentaly ill? Don't act so surprised. Sometimes it seems all geniuses throughout history have been off their rockers:p.


!@#%^&*&$@#$%*

abuse of the term mental illness!
Thank you for pointing this out so I won't have to.

[asmodean]

As I have said in the past, there is circumstantial evidence that Mr "bwinwright" is actually John P Boatwright:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4074321&highlight=boatwright#post4074321

who has trolled Usenet for decades.

If you do a search in Google Groups for him, you will see that in thousands of postings he has learned nothing about anything that has a basis in reality.


IMHO YMMV & etc. ;)

Boaty? Here? We need 10CC BAAWA, stat! :P

[Fnord]

Let's see: denying reality, talking to yourself, referring to the same old texts over and over, collective indoctrination through fear, strange rituals, seeing things that are not there...

You left out "Hearing voices that no one else can hear originating from inside your head, burning shrubs, or the sky".

[JFrankA]

I read the first paragraph, then scanned the comments and stopped.

Clearly this is an attempt to get attention. I don't see it as a "them theists poking a stick at us atheists", so to speak. I see it as someone trying to get attention.

This post is all the attention I am willing to give him.

[Fredrik]

I ask them to give me a single example of anything, outside of what they call nature, that came into being without intelligent direction. Of course, they can not.

How about these antennae?

http://ti.arc.nasa.gov/projects/esg/images/st5-3-10.jpghttp://ti.arc.nasa.gov/projects/esg/images/st5_4w-03.jpg

These were found by an algoritm based on random mutations and selection, and they're better than anything humans have been able to think of.

[blobru]

Well, I was surfing the internet (as I happen to do quite a bit), and noticed an article that caught my attention. The title of the article is "Atheism is a Mental Illness, a cry for attention". I noticed that the author is bwinwright, who posts here a bit, and admits as such in the article.

Atheism is a Mental Illness (http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/3379447-atheism-is-a-mental-illness-a-cry-for-attention)

His premise is (paraphrasing): atheists are protesting organised religion. They cannot possibly deny that an intelligent being created the universe. Order requires an intelligent being.

He never really addresses how he came to the conclusion that being an atheist infers that one must have a mental illness. The article revolves around a big straw man to support his beliefs as well. Too bad. Maybe someone else has another take on it.


Why is it:

Articles defending Intelligent Design always appear to have been produced without it?

Articles accusing others of mental illness always appear to have been produced by it?

...

...

...

No rush, these are rhetorical questions. :rr:

[realpaladin]

Why is it:

Articles defending Intelligent Design always appear to have been produced without it?

Articles accusing others of mental illness always appear to have been produced by it?

...

...

...

No rush, these are rhetorical questions. :rr:

Appear? You mean to say there is more than meets the eye there?

[blobru]

Appear? You mean to say there is more than meets the eye there?


Apparently.


:covereyes :D

[Safe-Keeper]

These were found by an algoritm based on random mutations and selection, and they're better than anything humans have been able to think of.Read a whole article on those in a Scandinavian popular science magazine, and both the way they did it and the result are just amazing. According to the article, there were even a couple antennae that the scientists were unable to explain, function-wise - they worked flawlessly, but the researchers were clueless as to how.

Of course, all of this falls flat to fundamentalists, who'll ask who created the tools and world in which the researchers did their project, point out that it's not natural selection because it's driven by humans, or derail the discussion in other ways. But it's still a fantastic method of innovation that I feel will give us many awesome, not to say inexplicable, inventions in the future.

[epeeist]

Before even looking at the linked item (which I've now only glanced at), I assumed it was a parody of the "religion is a mental illness" theme (or theism is child abuse, or whatever) that is prevalent in some circles (do a Google search). No-one on this board has ever even implied such, of course... :rolleyes:

So it's certainly possible that this is or was intended as a parody or satire of the corresponding opposite sentiment expressed by some atheists.

[Fnord]

How about these antennae?

http://ti.arc.nasa.gov/projects/esg/images/st5-3-10.jpghttp://ti.arc.nasa.gov/projects/esg/images/st5_4w-03.jpg

These were found by an algoritm based on random mutations and selection, and they're better than anything humans have been able to think of.

Sorry ... that algorithm was produced by intelligent intent, which directed the design of those antennae.

Now, if those antennae had spontaneaously assembled themselves from nothing, then you could claim that they were produced without intelligent intent.

[dlorde]

Before even looking at the linked item (which I've now only glanced at), I assumed it was a parody of the "religion is a mental illness" theme (or theism is child abuse, or whatever) that is prevalent in some circles (do a Google search).
I thought it was just an ironic joke - "Atheism is a Mental Illness, a cry for attention" this from someone publishing what is obviously a cry for attention itself, and with content that makes one doubt the writer's sanity... seemed ironic to me.

Some of the comments are amusing though :)

[Foster Zygote]

so is he say Einstein, Hawking, Sagan, et al, were mentaly ill?

I'm not sure about Hawking, but Sagan identified himself as an agnostic and Einstein called himself a pantheist in the sense that Spinoza used the term. But Einstein's pantheism bears little resemblance to bwinwright's version, and I'm sure all three would find no merit in his claims.

[bobcarp]

Anyone who doesn't believe in sky-daddy or magic is mentally ill. Didn't you know? :p

I don't believe in Santa Claus either, so I must be a total idiot!:jaw-dropp

[Safe-Keeper]

Sorry ... that algorithm was produced by intelligent intent, which directed the design of those antennae.I called it:p (and now feel bad as Fnord is of course not a fundamentalist, but oh well)!

[Fredrik]

Sorry ... that algorithm was produced by intelligent intent, which directed the design of those antennae.

Now, if those antennae had spontaneaously assembled themselves from nothing, then you could claim that they were produced without intelligent intent.
Why would I want to claim that? :confused: Not only is it 100% obvious that it took both intelligence and intent to find the algorithm, but if the antennae had "spontaneously assembled themselves from nothing", it wouldn't have been an example of what evolution can do. It would have been evidence of something supernatural.

[Elizabeth I]

Ah, he's the Boatwright mentioned in example 22 here?

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

That sounds like him. ;)

I don't know, that No. 22 sounds like it could be yrreg too.

[blobru]

I don't know, that No. 22 sounds like it could be yrreg too.


I thought yrreg's proof was based on his penis?

(then again, that might be premise 1)

[Kopji]

It's like throwing holy water on Satan. It's fun!

Well I'm convinced. :rolleyes:

All things being what they seem to be, he makes a pretty good case that the Intelligent Designer is evil.

[CelticRose]

Ya gotta read this guy's profile on that site. Be sure to read the entire bit titled "My Story".

http://www.allvoices.com/users/bwinwright

I now have 3 people on my ignore list. :oldroll:

[asmodean]

Sorry ... that algorithm was produced by intelligent intent, which directed the design of those antennae.

Now, if those antennae had spontaneaously assembled themselves from nothing, then you could claim that they were produced without intelligent intent.

You do know that genetic algorithsm do not contain any directions from what is evolved, except for a fitness function? And in this case the fitness function would only be how good reception the antenna gets? Do you really mean that if you randomly slap some Rule 10 together, test it, see how well it works as an antenna, randomly modify the structure, test again, repeat wash rince is intelligent directed design?

[realpaladin]

You do know that genetic algorithsm do not contain any directions from what is evolved, except for a fitness function? And in this case the fitness function would only be how good reception the antenna gets? Do you really mean that if you randomly slap some sh*t together, test it, see how well it works as an antenna, randomly modify the structure, test again, repeat wash rince is intelligent directed design?

I think he refers to as the 'fitness function' being intelligently designed.

He probably wants to make the argument that if the antenae suddenly appeared and you would see them and say 'Hey! Maybe those are good antennae!' and you would use them and they then would prove to be the most excellent antennae ONLY THEN no intelligent design was involved.

You want to make the argument that 'life, to exist at all, has to conform to several fitness functions' and therefore can evolve whilst conforming to those, without having a predetermined building plan.

Neither arguments preclude the other or are even in direct contest with each other.

So, to augment argument 1: The evolution of those antennae did not use any predetermined plan, so they were not intelligently 'designed', although the fitness for their habitat was. But that is just the confines of the experiment.

Augmenting argument 2: Show me something that has no intelligently designed fitness functions that produced something like these antennae.

Hajime!

[Bikewer]

I seem to recall that before the collapse of the Soviet Union, this was the common tactic used against dissidents there.
It was not conceivable that a good, practicing Communist would be anything but happy and well-adjusted.
So, dissidents were de facto nuts......

[DC]

Blaspehmy !!!!!!!!!!!!

God created us the way we are, including the Atheists. and now one of his other creations dears to critizie god's creation and call some of his creations mentally ill....

mmmhhh oh boy, you just can hope we atheists are right and God is indeed pure fantasy, else you end up in hell together with us mentally ill creations.

[Pure Argent]

There should be a "good-sportsmanship" rule on this site. You should be allowed to say whatever you want - dump as much hate on atheists as you desire, for example - but you should then be required to stick around and take your lumps.

[HeyLeroy]

Gee, and here I thought it was the other way around...

Epilepsy has long been associated with holy (or unholy) status. In the book we describe how temporal lobe seizures often result in intense religious experiences, including feeling the presence of God, feeling that one is in heaven, and seeing emanations of light from the sky, from objects, and even from body parts.
http://www.welcometoyourbrain.com/2008/02/spirit-possession-and-religious.html

Geschwind syndrome, also known as Waxman-Geschwind syndrome or "Gastaut-Geschwind" is a characteristic personality syndrome consisting of symptoms such as circumstantiality (excessive verbal output, stickiness, hypergraphia), altered sexuality (usually hyposexuality, meaning a decreased interest), and intensified mental life (deepened cognitive and emotional responses), hyper-religiosity and/or hyper-morality or moral ideas, that is present in some epilepsy patients. This syndrome is particularly associated with usually left-side temporal lobe epilepsy.
Geschwind_syndrome

Vilayanur S. Ramachandran explored the neural basis of the hyperreligiosity seen in TLE using galvanic skin response, which correlates with emotional arousal, to determine whether the hyperreligiosity seen in TLE was due to an overall enhanced emotional response, or if the enhancement was specific to religious stimuli (Ramachandran and Blakeslee, 1998). By presenting subjects with neutral, sexually arousing and religious words while measuring GSR, Ramachandran was able to show that patients with TLE showed enhanced emotional responses to the religious words, diminished responses to the sexually charged words, and normal responses to the neutral words. These results suggest that the medial temporal lobe is specifically involved in generating some of the emotional reactions associated with religious words, images and symbols.
Temporal_lobe_epilepsy

All highlighting mine.

[TimCallahan]

ORDER REQUIRES INTELLIGENT DIRECTION.

Say that enough times, all in caps, and anyone who disagrees with your will automatically be mentally ill.

I might recommend an experiment to this twit (not that it would impress him in the least). Take a jar loosely packed with randomly mixed large white marbles and small black ones. Shake it in a random manner, only taking care to keep it generally upright. If ORDER REQUIRES INTELLIGENT DIRECTION, then the marbles should remain randomly mixed. However, this is NOT what will happen. After a while, the marbles will self-organize, with the smll black ones on the bottom and the large white ones on top.

[Ron_Tomkins]

If Atheism is a mental illness, then every single newborn baby, animal and plant is clinically insane

We're gonna need quite a large Ark to put all those wackos in, Jimbo

[sadhatter]

So i was going to go through the article and make a point by point refutation, but suddenly i thought that the time anyone spent reading my post would be better spent doing anything else they could possibly think of. So i will try and keep this short.

This article was a redundant mess that whips up the authors internet chatter into an epic froth of personal growth, and battles between the forces of good and evil.

And on some level the constant use of the phrase " false idea" bothers me. Not in some offended by the idea way, but more so from a literary standpoint.

Misguided idea, evil idea, harmful idea, bad idea, deranged idea. All of these would have been very accurate in regards to the authors intent in describing atheism , and none of these would have bothered me. But there is something about the phrase false idea, that seems to imply that the very idea of there not being a god is not a possibility. ( which would beg me to differ in opinion.)

Or maybe i am reading too much into a short article that is only being read due to peoples need to discuss its strange nature.