The Abraham Dilemma: A Divine Delusion

by George Graham

What is a religious or spiritual delusion? What does religious delusion reveal about the difference between good and bad spirituality? What is the connection between religious delusion and moral failure? Or between religious delusion and religious terrorism? Or religious delusion and despair?The Abraham A Divine Delusion is the first book written by a philosopher on the topic of religious delusion - on the disorder's causes, contents, consequences, diagnosis and treatment. The book argues that we cannot understand a religious delusion without appreciating three facts. One is that religiosity or spirituality is a part of human nature, whether it takes theistic or non-theistic forms. Another is that religious delusion is something to which we are all vulnerable.The third is that the delusion is not best understood by reducing it to brain chemistry, or by insisting that it is empirically false. It is best understood by examining its harmful personal and moral consequences - consequences that nearly unfolded when the biblical patriarch Abraham prepared to sacrificehis son Isaac in response to a command, he thought, from God.The book presents a fascinating and profound exploration of a phenomenon as old as mankind itself.

Genres: Philosophy, Psychology, Psychiatry

192 pages, Kindle Edition

First published November 1, 2015

About the author

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.

Dr Graham is Professor of Philosophy at Georgia State University. He specializes in philosophy of mind, philosophical psychopathology (philosophy and psychiatry), and cognitive science.

View his academic profile at http://philosophy.gsu.edu/profile/geo...

Reviews

[Boris Tizenberg · Rating 4 out of 5]

A interesting read that attempts to address the challenge of drawing a solid line between fervorous religiosity and religious delusions. The book takes a philosophical approach to address the problem and creates a solid argument on where the distinction lies. The theory is both interesting and compelling. The only downside is that the theory does not translate well to clinical work.