This is a logical question, given that the most extreme bible bangers we've seen - from Pastor Fred Phelps, to Rev. Jim Jones and "Pastor Mike" - all seem to have one or more screws loose. One beholds it when they're observed to "go off" not only on atheists, but other believers too! They are predisposed to toss all others into Hellfire who don't believe in the exact same way!
Rather than take to heart Thomas Jefferson's famous words:
"It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg"
The belligerent fundagelicals are deeply grieved and upset to the point of warfare and the need to "convert" - should their neighbors not follow the exact prescription they ordain. So, playing on the words of Jefferson, it appears not only are their "pockets picked" by a sincere and unrepentant atheist (or Catholic!) but all their bones are fractured too - probably with multiple fractures!
So, why is it some can allow for the '20 gods or no gods' choices of others, but others cannot? Why is it some have to call down a hellish afterlife on their brothers for believing differently, while many couldn't care less?
I believe this is a symptom of a form of schizoid or even personality disorder, and I also believe that appopriate psycho-therapy can control it, if not totally cure it. (Note: Normally, I am not an endorser of psycho-therapy, but in this case- having seen some of the results on bible bangers in the past, I believe it can work)
In the 1970s, Barbadian therapist Pat Bannister employed a technique which was made popular at the time, called "transactional analysis" (developed by Dr. Eric Berne). In this thematic, the ego was regarded as partitioned between three forces or alter-personas, known as" "Parent", "Child" and "Adult". It was also made popular by a number of paperback books, including the famous 'I'm Okay- You're Okay' by Amy and Thomas Harris. The title basically reflected the rationalist position of the adult ego - that it regards all other humans as "okay" as oneself and unconditionally - irrespective of their beliefs, so long as they don't incite or induce harm to others. One might even think of the words as a logical takeoff on Jefferson's words. Obviously, if one's fellows' exhibit beliefs that "neither pick one's pocket" or "break his legs" - than that other fellow or fellows are okay. Whether they want to engage in Wicca worship, Science of Mind, Eckanckar, ordinary spiritual scholarship, Islam or no belief at all.
The aim of therapy in Bannister's transactional analysis sessions (which sometimes included group therapy) was to entice religiously officious, self-righteous people to depress or reduce the role of their "parent". This part of the psyche is the finger-wagging, preachy, authoritarian, sanctimonious, 'know it all' that dictates what's best for all others and won't accept or tolerate any differences. "My way or the highway" is its byword, never mind they themselves are borderline psychotics or sociopaths.
Most relationship conflicts occur when one partner is overweighted with his "Parent" and the other has more of the "Child" - the unhibited, playful and spontaneous self that likes to play games, joke, and not take life overly seriously. "Crossed transactions" denoted by P<-> C for example, are those for which two personas are constantly in conflict. It can also be: A<->P, as when a rationalist constantly goes against an authoritarian (e.g. in state of the world debates) who only knows how to quote his bible, but can't think. Bannister's job to attain recovered bible beaters was to get them to reduce the "Parent" and upload more of the playful Child. At the same time, she sought to interject more of the rational adult in each partner - which would act as a bridge between parent and child. As Amy and Thomas Harris put it ('Staying OK', p. 16):
"The Child includes our instincts and biological urges, genetic recordings, our physical selves, curiosity and intuition. It contains joy as well as sadness. Whereas the Parent is filled with demands, directions and slogans, the Child is filled with desire. The Child is where the 'want to' motivation is"
The key about the Parent part of the psyche is that it's externally derived, while Adult and Child and internally manifested over time. The "Parent" is basically the ineradicable recording of one's early life history and it will be hyper-critical or nurturing or both, to the extent one's parents or primary caretakers were. It's created, in other words, via assimilation over time - mainly from the parents - but other external authorities may play their own role (say if the person went into the military and was subject to extreme military authority or even abuse to impose that authority - e.g. Marines at Parris Island being forced to clean latrines with their tongues, etc.)
Meanwhile, the "Adult" is the ally and expediter of the rational and scientific mindset. The Adult reasons, thinks, predicts and figures out how to do things - and over a time, must use this template to consider the consequences of actions.
In Bannister's therapy, the empowerment of the Adult was key to negotiating successful interactions between Parent and Child. As the authors note (p. 18):
"The Adult is not only a functional part of the personality but a state, observable by others in the present. A person in the Adult state appears thoughtful, rational and in the here and now. ...One of the important functions of the Adult is to update the Parent".
Part of this updating entails ridding the Parent of its overbearing demands and negativities, criticisms, so one can come to greater self-acceptance. For some personalities, almost taken over by their Parent, this is extremely difficult.
In his landmark work, Cruelty and Kindness: A New Look at Aggression and Altruism, author Harvey A. Hornstein hones in on some of the major personality dysfunctions and how they arise. Most enlightening is how he reveals the behaviors of what he calls "Authoritarians" - which would be extreme Parent-dominated types. One major defect? These people almost automatically discriminate between people - and reject those they consider as unworthy or not on their level, morally or in other ways. To these people: "Not all humans are created equal".
Hornstein further notes(p. 40):
"Authoritarians are socially exclusive. Their prematurely definitive and harshly judgmental distinctions between ingroups and outgroups are fruitless attempts to resolve their own intra-psychic conflict. Their prejudice is an almost indelible aftermath of the quality of their childhood attachment to their principal cartetakers".
Thus, if the little person was often beaten with a ping pong paddle to nearly an inch of his life - say by a nursery school caretaker- he'd likely grow up in this mold. Add on some military training hazing and abuse, and you have almost the perfect anti-social personality, who not only believes HE is right, but condemns those who don't believe as he does. For example, this person would never make friends or be friends with someone of different religious persuasion. An unbeliever would be rejected off the bat as anathema except for possible "witnessing" purposes.
Most fundies, as Bannister related to me based on her ongoing studies, suffered from a hyper-authoritarian complex. Because of this, they're initially unable to relate to others via any other but Parent mode. (Child and Adult originated transactions nearly unheard of.) They also tend to be much more prejudiced and bigoted than the population norm, possibly because their archaic biblical beliefs (as literalists) often reinforce their personal bias, while a working Adult would mitigate it. For example, they'd likely be prejudiced against all blacks based on their belief they are the "sons of Ham" who are condemned to be "hewers of wood and drawers of water". Hornstein adds (p. 41):
"Intolerant, prejudiced, authoritarian people are not at ease. The baggage of their youth is filled with inescapable hates and fears. Mistrusting their own impulses they are wary of others and the impulses that they might possess. Their world becomes a jungle which must be carefully scrutinized because it is filled with human beings who harbor the 'evil' that they painfully learn to deny in themselves"
But, as we have seen with numerous fundies, evangelicals, some times that "evil" breaks out - erupts like a volcano and causes grief to them and others. The Jonestown massacre comes to mind: over 900 dead because Jim Jones' pent up evil burst forth and annihilated those whom he believed had questioned his authority. Less vile, Jimmy Swaggart's porn and prostitute addictions in New Orleans, then we recently had Pastor Ted Haggard abandoning all his fire and brimstone anti-gay speeches while he got "massaged" by a gay guy. (Though he still insists there was no sex. Yeah, and I guess Haggard never inhaled when he tried his dope either.)
But the still sealed up Fundies, who pride themselves on their sanctimony, have no qualms about dishing out their judgements well before hand, to the extent of even drawing little cartoon Hells and inserting all those they hate within. As Bannister noted, and Hornstein pointed out, an even more malignant permutation of authoritarianism involves the element of the "necrophilous" character or personality. In this case, the obsession is with death or constantly emphasizing the threat of death, in order to instill fears by which they can manipulate others.
One of the most necrophilous authoritarians of all time was Adolf Hitler, according to Hornstein(p. 34) and we know what he did, and how far it went. As Hornstein puts it (in terms of Hitler's mental disorder:) "..nestled at the core of the disorder, like a worm in the core of an apple, was a malignantly incestuous fixation with his mother". Hornstein believes this disorder grew because Hitler's Oedipus fantasies remained unfulfilled, even with his assorted female friends, including his later wife, Eva Braun.
Bannister was, of course, aware of all this, which is why she believed intense therapy was the best way to treat hyper-religious, fanatical bible beaters. In the end, she believed that our whole global culture would be enriched and made more whole, more healthy if more of these authortarian, Parent-dominated personalities could be helped. A first step, as she put it, "will be a massive reduction in the number of instances they have to cite scripture".
I totally agree - since we don't refer to such obsessions and knee-jerk responses (say in debates on evolution) as 'appeal to authority' for nothing!
Rather than take to heart Thomas Jefferson's famous words:
"It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg"
The belligerent fundagelicals are deeply grieved and upset to the point of warfare and the need to "convert" - should their neighbors not follow the exact prescription they ordain. So, playing on the words of Jefferson, it appears not only are their "pockets picked" by a sincere and unrepentant atheist (or Catholic!) but all their bones are fractured too - probably with multiple fractures!
So, why is it some can allow for the '20 gods or no gods' choices of others, but others cannot? Why is it some have to call down a hellish afterlife on their brothers for believing differently, while many couldn't care less?
I believe this is a symptom of a form of schizoid or even personality disorder, and I also believe that appopriate psycho-therapy can control it, if not totally cure it. (Note: Normally, I am not an endorser of psycho-therapy, but in this case- having seen some of the results on bible bangers in the past, I believe it can work)
In the 1970s, Barbadian therapist Pat Bannister employed a technique which was made popular at the time, called "transactional analysis" (developed by Dr. Eric Berne). In this thematic, the ego was regarded as partitioned between three forces or alter-personas, known as" "Parent", "Child" and "Adult". It was also made popular by a number of paperback books, including the famous 'I'm Okay- You're Okay' by Amy and Thomas Harris. The title basically reflected the rationalist position of the adult ego - that it regards all other humans as "okay" as oneself and unconditionally - irrespective of their beliefs, so long as they don't incite or induce harm to others. One might even think of the words as a logical takeoff on Jefferson's words. Obviously, if one's fellows' exhibit beliefs that "neither pick one's pocket" or "break his legs" - than that other fellow or fellows are okay. Whether they want to engage in Wicca worship, Science of Mind, Eckanckar, ordinary spiritual scholarship, Islam or no belief at all.
The aim of therapy in Bannister's transactional analysis sessions (which sometimes included group therapy) was to entice religiously officious, self-righteous people to depress or reduce the role of their "parent". This part of the psyche is the finger-wagging, preachy, authoritarian, sanctimonious, 'know it all' that dictates what's best for all others and won't accept or tolerate any differences. "My way or the highway" is its byword, never mind they themselves are borderline psychotics or sociopaths.
Most relationship conflicts occur when one partner is overweighted with his "Parent" and the other has more of the "Child" - the unhibited, playful and spontaneous self that likes to play games, joke, and not take life overly seriously. "Crossed transactions" denoted by P<-> C for example, are those for which two personas are constantly in conflict. It can also be: A<->P, as when a rationalist constantly goes against an authoritarian (e.g. in state of the world debates) who only knows how to quote his bible, but can't think. Bannister's job to attain recovered bible beaters was to get them to reduce the "Parent" and upload more of the playful Child. At the same time, she sought to interject more of the rational adult in each partner - which would act as a bridge between parent and child. As Amy and Thomas Harris put it ('Staying OK', p. 16):
"The Child includes our instincts and biological urges, genetic recordings, our physical selves, curiosity and intuition. It contains joy as well as sadness. Whereas the Parent is filled with demands, directions and slogans, the Child is filled with desire. The Child is where the 'want to' motivation is"
The key about the Parent part of the psyche is that it's externally derived, while Adult and Child and internally manifested over time. The "Parent" is basically the ineradicable recording of one's early life history and it will be hyper-critical or nurturing or both, to the extent one's parents or primary caretakers were. It's created, in other words, via assimilation over time - mainly from the parents - but other external authorities may play their own role (say if the person went into the military and was subject to extreme military authority or even abuse to impose that authority - e.g. Marines at Parris Island being forced to clean latrines with their tongues, etc.)
Meanwhile, the "Adult" is the ally and expediter of the rational and scientific mindset. The Adult reasons, thinks, predicts and figures out how to do things - and over a time, must use this template to consider the consequences of actions.
In Bannister's therapy, the empowerment of the Adult was key to negotiating successful interactions between Parent and Child. As the authors note (p. 18):
"The Adult is not only a functional part of the personality but a state, observable by others in the present. A person in the Adult state appears thoughtful, rational and in the here and now. ...One of the important functions of the Adult is to update the Parent".
Part of this updating entails ridding the Parent of its overbearing demands and negativities, criticisms, so one can come to greater self-acceptance. For some personalities, almost taken over by their Parent, this is extremely difficult.
In his landmark work, Cruelty and Kindness: A New Look at Aggression and Altruism, author Harvey A. Hornstein hones in on some of the major personality dysfunctions and how they arise. Most enlightening is how he reveals the behaviors of what he calls "Authoritarians" - which would be extreme Parent-dominated types. One major defect? These people almost automatically discriminate between people - and reject those they consider as unworthy or not on their level, morally or in other ways. To these people: "Not all humans are created equal".
Hornstein further notes(p. 40):
"Authoritarians are socially exclusive. Their prematurely definitive and harshly judgmental distinctions between ingroups and outgroups are fruitless attempts to resolve their own intra-psychic conflict. Their prejudice is an almost indelible aftermath of the quality of their childhood attachment to their principal cartetakers".
Thus, if the little person was often beaten with a ping pong paddle to nearly an inch of his life - say by a nursery school caretaker- he'd likely grow up in this mold. Add on some military training hazing and abuse, and you have almost the perfect anti-social personality, who not only believes HE is right, but condemns those who don't believe as he does. For example, this person would never make friends or be friends with someone of different religious persuasion. An unbeliever would be rejected off the bat as anathema except for possible "witnessing" purposes.
Most fundies, as Bannister related to me based on her ongoing studies, suffered from a hyper-authoritarian complex. Because of this, they're initially unable to relate to others via any other but Parent mode. (Child and Adult originated transactions nearly unheard of.) They also tend to be much more prejudiced and bigoted than the population norm, possibly because their archaic biblical beliefs (as literalists) often reinforce their personal bias, while a working Adult would mitigate it. For example, they'd likely be prejudiced against all blacks based on their belief they are the "sons of Ham" who are condemned to be "hewers of wood and drawers of water". Hornstein adds (p. 41):
"Intolerant, prejudiced, authoritarian people are not at ease. The baggage of their youth is filled with inescapable hates and fears. Mistrusting their own impulses they are wary of others and the impulses that they might possess. Their world becomes a jungle which must be carefully scrutinized because it is filled with human beings who harbor the 'evil' that they painfully learn to deny in themselves"
But, as we have seen with numerous fundies, evangelicals, some times that "evil" breaks out - erupts like a volcano and causes grief to them and others. The Jonestown massacre comes to mind: over 900 dead because Jim Jones' pent up evil burst forth and annihilated those whom he believed had questioned his authority. Less vile, Jimmy Swaggart's porn and prostitute addictions in New Orleans, then we recently had Pastor Ted Haggard abandoning all his fire and brimstone anti-gay speeches while he got "massaged" by a gay guy. (Though he still insists there was no sex. Yeah, and I guess Haggard never inhaled when he tried his dope either.)
But the still sealed up Fundies, who pride themselves on their sanctimony, have no qualms about dishing out their judgements well before hand, to the extent of even drawing little cartoon Hells and inserting all those they hate within. As Bannister noted, and Hornstein pointed out, an even more malignant permutation of authoritarianism involves the element of the "necrophilous" character or personality. In this case, the obsession is with death or constantly emphasizing the threat of death, in order to instill fears by which they can manipulate others.
One of the most necrophilous authoritarians of all time was Adolf Hitler, according to Hornstein(p. 34) and we know what he did, and how far it went. As Hornstein puts it (in terms of Hitler's mental disorder:) "..nestled at the core of the disorder, like a worm in the core of an apple, was a malignantly incestuous fixation with his mother". Hornstein believes this disorder grew because Hitler's Oedipus fantasies remained unfulfilled, even with his assorted female friends, including his later wife, Eva Braun.
Bannister was, of course, aware of all this, which is why she believed intense therapy was the best way to treat hyper-religious, fanatical bible beaters. In the end, she believed that our whole global culture would be enriched and made more whole, more healthy if more of these authortarian, Parent-dominated personalities could be helped. A first step, as she put it, "will be a massive reduction in the number of instances they have to cite scripture".
I totally agree - since we don't refer to such obsessions and knee-jerk responses (say in debates on evolution) as 'appeal to authority' for nothing!
No comments:
Post a Comment