Curing religious belief think-tank

[Luke O]

Luke's key point on the CAUSES of religious beliefs (appart from early endocrination which I think the majority of us agree with --> see prevention vs curing) is
that religions fulfill CORE human desires and that is why they are so hard to rectify (by rectify i mean to allow the individual to retain a similar level of objectivity as they would in other areas of their lives)

Interesting point Luke, would you care to expand on that or connect it to one of the answers I quoted above?

Well in the line of what [MENTION=10714]Qlip[/MENTION] said, step by step process on giving up religion, it works for some with cigarettes especially if you've been smoking them for a very long time.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

- What aspects of religion acts as 'blocks' to the questioning of their religious/magical beliefs
Adding shame or guilt to the concept of questioning and morality and goodness to believing. Doubting Thomas is a cautionary tale, when he should be admired for questioning and asking for evidence before believing. I had to come to realize that most faith is immoral by its very nature. Doubt is the moral course because if something is true, if someone is worth trusting, they will stand up to the process of questioning and doubt. The only beliefs and individuals served by complete faith are those who cannot hold up under scrutiny. Also, some religions have mantras, testimony, or other quotes people are supposed to start reciting anytime they have a doubt to serve as mind-blocking tactic.

- What could influence it: (behavior, etc.)
Most people like to think that they are convinced by logic, truth, and insight, but social comradry plays a bigger role, even for the introvert. When the religious people were incredibly unkind and the heathens were often kind, I realized that the belief system was not producing a very good result. It helped me when I became an expert in a subject field to see the church group I belonged to demonstrate clear ignorance. I realize that if these people were so ignorant of something completely knowable by humans, then how can they know the secrets of the cosmos and reality?

- Is it type dependant, do different types have different 'defense mechanisms' or is overall type not strictly relevant.
I'm sure each type, and furthermore each individual has their own defense mechanisms. The underlying principle is that humans do not like their inner constructs of reality shaken and broken. For some people the inner construct is normalcy, for others loving acceptance, for others still a sense of logic, etc.

- What method would you recommend in 'de-brainwashing' and individual and what strengthes/weaknesses do you think this method would have
I knew someone who tried to help cult members question their beliefs. He would rigorously research their belief systems, and then allow them to try to convert him. He would ask specific questions that revealed the dichotomies and inconsistencies of their beliefs. He first tried to understand their inner constructs before bringing the flaws of the system into focus.

- what research do you find relevant on the topic
All research related to coercion is relevant. The same principles work in cults that work in dysfunctional, abusive relationship, and political oppression. There are certain tactics that cause the majority of human beings to submit their wills to a group or system. One is love bombing - where the person is given a feeling of complete love and acceptance. That term comes from cult tactics, but it occurs in abusive relationships, political domination, etc. The next tactic is group oppression of the individual which could be requiring the person to confess their sins to the group in a shame session, being beaten up to be initiated into a cult, having an abusive parent tell the child they will always be stronger, etc. Inconsistency between these two extremes makes it impossible for the individual to calibrate their defenses and so sharpens the effects of both.

- how to go about testing what works and what doesn't, preferably with 'smaller steps' than trying to 'curing' a person right off. Perhaps by testing it on similar but 'smaller' stubbornly held irrational beliefs.
I would listen to their beliefs and ask them questions. I would not tell them "the truth" or "how things really are".

- what 'small' religious types beliefs could be used for testing?
Perhaps start with something more peripheral that the person feels they have some individual choice over. I wouldn't start with the core, required beliefs that determine their "goodness" or "eligibility for salvation", etc.

- what overall methodology would you propose for this venture
I would start by listening to the person, by being open to them. I also would maintain the mindset of non-control. I would make it clear that I would accept them regardless of their beliefs. I would embrace the person in kindness, but let go of the person for control of any outcome.

 

[geedoenfj]

I had a secular upbringing at home but it was primary school who tried to put the fear of God into me. Thankfully there was a lot less of that in high school.

I was more likely to accept an opinion as fact when I was younger. I guess that's why I was so homophobic as a kid.

So let me get this right, you think teaching children an opinion so they accept it as a fact is OK.. Right?
Well Don't you think that's in fact what the religious parents are doing? they have an opinion and make their children accept it as a fact? Why would this be deceiving it's just an opinion anyway..

 

[Luke O]

So let me get this right, you think teaching children an opinion so they accept it as a fact is OK.. Right?
Well Don't you think that's in fact what the religious parents are doing? they have an opinion and make their children accept it as a fact? Why would this be deceiving it's just an opinion anyway..

I didn't think it was right. Sometimes all we have is opinion to give to them, but they're not always told it is...

 

[geedoenfj]

I didn't think it was right. Sometimes all we have is opinion to give to them, but they're not always told it is...

I'm bothering you with questions I know [emoji5]️ I appreciate your responses that's very kind of you..
Well I think we are getting back to the point were the set of what is considered to be facts (or values) from a religious perspective are just representing a philosophy of life which -in parents' opinion- is just the right way to live, and it's just an opinion, other considered non-religious tenets like Atheism, Communism, Secularism, Nazism etc are all just an opinion, whether those children have been taught that it is an opinion or didn't
They shall grow up one day and make up their own minds and opinions

 

[GIjade]

First, I'd like to say that I don't think anyone needs to be "cured" of their religious beliefs. Why is that your business? If someone wants to believe in God, it's their right to do so.

I, however, am what some might call and atheist and don't believe in any sort of supernatural creator. I believe in evolution. So, as for your question about supporting literature on the subject, I would recommend the book "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins.

Quotes from the book:

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

“There is something infantile in the presumption that somebody else has a responsibility to give your life meaning and point… The truly adult view, by contrast, is that our life is as meaningful, as full and as wonderful as we choose to make it.”

“When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.”

― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion

 

[Kullervo]

I find the whole idea of a "cure religion" think tank rather smug, patronising and condescending. Let people make up their own minds.

 

[Lark]

I find the whole idea of a "cure religion" think tank rather smug, patronising and condescending. Let people make up their own minds.

It is but I tend to find atheism per se that way, if it were passe then I doubt most of the people I've seen championing that particular cause doing so or taking an interest either way.

If everyone did think exactly as you did what difference would it make? Besides making the world an incredibly dull place.

I tend to find that atheists of the Dawkins ilk are kinda like heresy hunters of days gone by. Who cares about that noise?

 

[Kullervo]

It is but I tend to find atheism per se that way, if it were passe then I doubt most of the people I've seen championing that particular cause doing so or taking an interest either way.

Atheism has no creed, it's just a position you can take on the God question. The people you are referring to are anti-Christian Marxists, for whom opposition to religion is more ideological than philosophical.

If everyone did think exactly as you did what difference would it make? Besides making the world an incredibly dull place.

I tend to find that atheists of the Dawkins ilk are kinda like heresy hunters of days gone by. Who cares about that noise?

I have a lot of respect for Richard Dawkins, because he's consistent in how he views religious belief. He and others like him have been pushed out of atheist intellectual circles in recent years by the SJWs (see Elevatorgate), and once that happened, I left too. It was one of the main events that precipitated my move towards nationalism, but that's another story.

 

[Lark]

Atheism has no creed, it's just a position you can take on the God question. The people you are referring to are anti-Christian Marxists, for whom opposition to religion is more ideological than philosophical.



I have a lot of respect for Richard Dawkins, because he's consistent in how he views religious belief. He and others like him have been pushed out of atheist intellectual circles in recent years by the SJWs (see Elevatorgate), and once that happened, I left too. It was one of the main events that precipitated my move towards nationalism, but that's another story.

All a lot of weird right wing talk here, nothing to see.

 

[Litsnob]

I think that one of the biggest obstacles is valuing faith. I am often accused by believers of having faith too and thus it is irrational for me to critique their faith. Faith can be misplaced though and I do not place a high value on faith I simply have to use it. For instance, I do not understand how an airplane stays up. (okay I sort of do but physics is not my greatest strength) But I have faith, or I trust, that others do and I have evidence to support my trust. More often than not, airplanes stay up so I will ride in one. In a sense I am relying on faith here, and I am even putting my life into the hands of others whom I have faith in.

I think the difference lies in a practical, daily use of faith, as opposed to thinking that faith is the most valuable thing. Believers are essentially told not to think too much, not to look for evidence, because Faith is more virtuous and God loves it more. If the evidence for successful air travel had as many holes in it as the evidence for the existence of God, I would not get in an airplane and I would not listen to anyone who told me that getting in the airplane was virtuous. Or at least I sure hope I would not listen.