One of my brothers is diagnosed as being a paranoid schizophrenic. I also ran a medical clinic in downtown Atlanta, that had a psychiatrist come in on Friday morning and treat all the homeless paranoid schizophrenics. So I have some acquaintance with the condition. My point is that fundamentalism is a feature of schizophrenia not a bug. (Or did I get that backward) lol
Fundamentalism may not be the correct word. Charismatic would probably be the camp many paranoid schizophrenics are most prone to gravitate towards if they are Christian. And Charismatics are not fundamentalists IMO. But I have also met paranoid schizophrenics who are not Christians. One of the ones I met was preoccupied with the Illuminati running everything. He pointed towards the parking lot away from where we were sitting, and he noted how 4 license plates all started with the same letter. He remarked with complete confidence that it was the Illuminati and that they were bringing about the end of the world within the next two weeks. He then proceeded to tell me how Christianity is patently false rubbish because of science, much like you would. So, paranoid schizophrenia can take on different forms. It simply depends on the person’s worldview.
I was thinking of all religions having fundamentalists who do crazy things. Suicide bombers are typically Muslims. Weren’t there Buddhist who set themselves of fire protesting I think our involvement in Vietnam.
I treat all religions more or less the same, with contempt. Ricky Gervais says I don’t believe in 6000 gods. You don’t believe in 5999. He follows it up with tell me why you don’t believe in the 5999 and I will ask you to use the same logic on the one you do believe.
I would note that on the surface it appears your confidence rests on inductive reasoning. There are lots of examples of misplaced belief. I agree with that. Your argument has an aura of reasonableness to it, yet inductive arguments have often fallen short and led to bad conclusions. For example, we were told that housing prices always go up because that was a pattern in the past. Then they did not go up, and the housing crisis happened. Inductive reasoning could also lead us to the conclusion that people in general misplace confidence in false worldviews. You are a person with a worldview, so who is to say inductive reasoning could not equally lead to the conclusion that you are wrong about your worldview? You might cry foul over that sort of argumentation I put forward above, but I would contend that it is of the same species as the argument you put forward in terms of its rigor and ability to stand up to a critical analysis. That argument as well as yours amount to a hasty generalization, and these sorts of arguments are ripe hanging tempting fruit that can lead to all kinds of false conclusions if you are not careful. Now, inductive reasoning has its place and is helpful and useful. I am not questioning that. However, it is also easily misused to reach false conclusions that are demonstrably false upon further examination. So, we should engage in such arguments with an abundance of caution. Further examination is needed.
I have no idea how this word salad applies other than you don’t know what inductive reasoning is. But I will play, perhaps real estate prices always go up over time is a truer statement. Opinions can be refined. None of this has anything to do with what I said.
I was not! Trump is easily diagnosed as a narcissist, sociopath, and psychopath from simple observation of what he says does and post. Dementia is a little harder but not over time. My clinical diagnosis was backed up by the dean of Cornell Psychiatry dept and was joined by 100 other preminent doctors who did the same as I. I have also worked up my own evaluation of certain posters and tell me tell you - The kids aren’t alright.
My response wasn't clear and I edited it. I was trying to say wrong ACCORDING TO HIM, not that you were wrong. Sorry for the confusion.
It is inductive reasoning because you are reasoning on the basis of a pattern. Go look up what an inductive proof is. A mathematical inductive proof seeks to show that if something is true for a value of n, then it is also true for n+1. Your argument amounts to f(n) = false religion for n=1, 2, 3, ..., 5999. Therefore f(6,000) = false religion. The easiest way to show the flaw in this type of reasoning is to come up with a counterexample. The first 5,999 integers are not divisible by the number 6,000. That does not mean that the pattern continuously carries forward for all integers. Something can be true in 5,999 instances, and then be drastically different in the 6,000th instance. And that depends upon the fundamental nature of the 6,000th instance. If the 6,000th instance of something is fundamentally different than the first 5,999 instances in some special way, then you would be wrong to assume that 5,999 instances of something prove every other instance is identical.
Okay that makes more sense but it’s still nonsense. You don’t believe in 5999 gods. Why don’t you? Basically there is no evidence for them. There also is no evidence for the Abrahamic either. It’s a three for one. I gave you Islam, Judaism and Christianity. It’s all nonsense. Let’s start with the story of Moses? The events in exodus never happened. The Egyptians kept records. They would have recorded half a million people leaving. So no Moses no Ten Commandments.
Here is one respected biblical historian. I can never remember how to spell her name so here is her Wikipedia page.
Or if not her actual page a screenshot of it. She thinks most of the Old Testament is legend. She backs up her beliefs with actual research.
There are archaeology studies that show many things to be quite literal. They found the wall of Jericho completely crumbled down for example. When an enemy military force invaded a city back then you would only break down one section of the wall. There was no reason to break down the entire wall around a city, but that is what archaeology shows.
