Psychology of Fundamentalism and Limiting Projection Issues

Given my propensity for evaluating human behavior in its many forms, one thing becomes evident; the individuals who identify themselves (passively or actively), as bible fundamentalists, young earth creationists, evangelicals, Teabaggers (all inferred insults applied), Christians, right-wing-nut-jobs etc. have a very well developed defense mechanism of Psychological Projection. 

Defining Projection -   albeit an older term (Freud) it still fits the thought paradigms today.  Simply defined:  A person will reject their own negative personality/character attribute(s) and then assign those same attributes to the person or entity they are in conflict with, in an effort to quell or reduce cognitive dissonance.  Described as a defense mechanism it works very well for the user as a way of displacing responsibility or distracts from the harm produced by one’s comments or actions.  This has also be identified as a False-Consensus  event but for the purpose of simplicity and ease of use I will continue to use ‘Projection.’

This can take on many forms.  As a whole Americans are naive to the effects of projection.    A person makes an assumption that all persons of the same persuasion or belief system thing and behave in the same fashion as he/she does given they ascribe to the same system – Both positive and negative. One is the perception that all Christians worship the same god or that all follow the same interpretation of the bible.  

More insidious Projection takes place when an Atheist confronts a Fundamentalist on their negative character attributes or perceived bias and they are reflected back with strong emotion and hostility.

An example of this was and exchange between a talented blogger nonprophetess and a random fundamentalist here.  He clearly has very biased views and aggressively projecting them on her and the other participants of the conversation.   

When addressed directly the dialog becomes immature and is resembles the grade school dialog “I know you are but what am I...?”  This will generally elicit a strong Counter Projection (Jung) escalating the conflict.

Example:

Makes one think, "Are you that unaware?"

When addressing Projection events one must understand that this is taking place at a rudimentary behavioral level and typically based on a defect of character or personality.  In the simplest terms it is like arguing with a five year old who needs a nap.  How to successfully address an exchange one can rely on the basic application of Applied Behavior Analysis.  Strongly reinforce any positives identified in the dialog even if that requires re-framing the dialog (this can and will elicit a very strong negative emotional response from the projector).

Dialog with a person projecting should resemble that of a dialog with a five year old.  Treat them accordingly.  You may have to break down the dialog into short simple sentences – state a core topic and stick to it.   They like to take people down the rabbit hole of delusion.   Continuously redirect them back to the core topic.  Consider if you will gain any benefit from it or will the other party?  Remember you are the one in control of the conversation and your emotions.  They are not.  Don’t own their issues.  We have enough of our own.

When a ‘Projector’ hits Crisis Phase (cognitive dissonance) this can and will elicit ‘Word Salad’ from the more disturbed individuals.   This should be a trigger to end the conversation due to individual being in an emotional crisis and unable to respond coherently.    This is also identified when scripture or bible verses are being quoted.  This is a signal that there is no longer a productive dialog going on and the person has recluses into their mental safe zone.

Decline the invitation to be angry and stay rational.

Race, Rights, and Religion Rant

I have been accused of racism based on my ridicule of Islam.  I am very curious why so many people perceive Islam as a race of individuals?   These persons are very eager and aggressive in their use of the racism perspective to defend the religion or their discriminatory actions.

I have also been very open with my criticism of Christianity and the associated actions of that religion.  Let’s take for examples in Idaho where I live; the Christians are working very hard to accomplish a couple of new laws:  No protections for LGBT individuals basically legalizing discriminatory practices against that part of the population.  A second piece of legislation allowing faith healing groups protection from prosecution based on the death of children due to negligent practices (faith healing).   

Using religious practices to inflict harm or actual death on a differing group of persons is akin to racism but  actually should be classified as discriminatory practice.   They then hide behind their ‘religious freedom’ to practice discrimination and negligent homicide of their own children.

There is no mention of race associated with these religious practices.  Yet there is a perception among the religious that one set of humans has more respect or rights to live free of discrimination or negligent death.  This profound lack of introspection by the followers is astounding.  The delusions professed by these people shake the foundations of reality and yet no one calls them out.

Using ‘religious practice’ as a shield to protect a person or a community based on bias is spineless and principled in disordered intellect.  To witness the death of a child due to willful disregard and then to attribute it to the will of some god is tantamount to negligent homicide.

When called out on their obvious immorality and held to scrutiny by the population as a whole as being corrupt they hurriedly build a barricade of racial or religious discrimination as a case against the accuser.

It is a cowardly practice to cry foul when the only misconduct has been on the part of the religious practitioner and you are unwilling to accept responsibility for your deeds.

Humanity cannot continue to hold any religion in reverence when it‘s followers use it as a way to deflect responsibility for immoral, discriminatory or juvenile actions.  

Sometimes those who are offended need to be.