Jehovah's Wittnesses

General discussions
Buzz
Posts: 151
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:35 am

Re: Jehovah's Wittnesses

Post by Buzz » Mon Nov 08, 2010 5:17 am

Feardorcha wrote:Sorry to intrude in this conversation between Buzz, Buzz and Buzz but I noticed this:
I believe that from personal experience - whereas you got your belief from some other method.
Very Jesuitical.
LOL

Very funny.
Buzz
Posts: 151
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:35 am

Re: Jehovah's Wittnesses

Post by Buzz » Mon Nov 08, 2010 5:21 am

Tulip1 wrote:yeah experience is everything, like people experiencing god, ghosts and angels.

experience can never give a false or be misleading impression then?? good argument... again
what are stupid poeple?

when dealing with people in life and death situations, in panics, accidents, shootings, and while trying to give medical assistance to the injured, experience is a big help actually.

but of course I expect you have never scooped up human brains off the road after a road accident, or see children shot in the brain.

I have those experiences.

When you go to hospital for surgery - just tell the doctor to let a med student do it because experience means nothing to you - and its just not important.
Last edited by Buzz on Mon Nov 08, 2010 5:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
Buzz
Posts: 151
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:35 am

Re: Jehovah's Wittnesses

Post by Buzz » Mon Nov 08, 2010 5:37 am

Ciaran wrote:+1 Tulip

Buzz, I work with people with various types of dementia and mental illness as well as those just physically disabled. Paramedics get called to bad situations so your work lets you experience the more dangerous of those with mental illness. Those who aren't dangerous or seriously altered just go to the doctor or get voluntarily checked into a hospital.

No one here is saying that all people with schizophrenia are not dangerous. However that is a far cry from a blanket term like "Schizophrenics are dangerous". Some are, most aren't. The vast majority of those with bipolar and major depression aren't violent and of those who are, few are seriously violent. Using hospital stats and extrapolating that to the general population just doesn't wash; the ones in hospital are there for a reason and that can often include violence.

I think you're on the back foot and being defensive because you got blindsided by the disagreement. Fair enough. I'm not arguing with your stats and I'm not saying all mentally people are hunky dory. I'm saying your point "Schizophrenics are dangerous" is a bad generalisation.

Can you take the point as valid even if you don't agree with it?
you make some good points.

I was instructed right from the start that schizophrenics are dangerous, and as I have shown, psychiatrists are killed by schizophrenics on a regular basis, I have also shown that between 5 and 10% of all homicides are done by schizophrenics. I have also shown that schizophrenics are highly likely to be violent.

I have shown these points a few times, but the popular belief in here that schizophrenics are harmless - even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, indicates to me that the holding on to a false belief in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is called delusion. And delusion is a symptom of schizophrenia.

The reality is, if I know someone is a schizophrenic, or I suspect as much, because of my experience, I know that the chances they will be violent is much higher than the general rate of the population. The reality is, schizophrenia is a serious illness, and undiagnosed and unmedicated, schizophrenics are not to be taken lightly and there is no room for complacency.

Anyone who is around a schizophrenic, and is complacent, is a statistic waiting to happen. All Schizophrenics are to be wary of, to be watched, and never let your guard down around one, because you never know what they will do - and they are dangerous. That is the reality, and I have experienced it many times and because of my training and experience, in the health care industry, I keep a weather eye on schizophrenics regardless of any other factor - I just do not trust them.

When between 5 and 10% of all homicides are pertetrated by schizophrenics, and schizophrenics are only a small number of the population, it boiled down to the fact that schizophrenics are dangerous - that is what I believe and will continue to believe.

This thread is about Jehovah's Witnesses, and the FACT that schizophrenia is 300 to 400% higher in that section of the community when compared to the general population.

Now you can say what you like and think what you like, but to me that sets alarm bells ringing.

Schizophrenics are not to be trusted because over all they are dangerous. I stand by that statement and if you people (or poeple) don't like it - stuff cheese - good luck to you when you meet a schizophrenic.
Tulip1
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1529
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 1:07 pm
Location: Sligo

Re: Jehovah's Wittnesses

Post by Tulip1 » Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:19 am

Buzz wrote:
Tulip1 wrote:yeah experience is everything, like people experiencing god, ghosts and angels.

experience can never give a false or be misleading impression then?? good argument... again
what are stupid poeple?

when dealing with people in life and death situations, in panics, accidents, shootings, and while trying to give medical assistance to the injured, experience is a big help actually.

but of course I expect you have never scooped up human brains off the road after a road accident, or see children shot in the brain.

I have those experiences.

When you go to hospital for surgery - just tell the doctor to let a med student do it because experience means nothing to you - and its just not important.
1. you don't know what or who I am or what my experiences are. You make asumptions based on absolutly nothing.

2. Are you trying to make a point here if so I completly miss it. Would you care to explain what this all has to do with my comment that experience doesn't esserly means that it is objective or even right? But yes experience can indeed help you cope under stress and training does make you improve. however it doesn't always helps you make a good jugement. I know people who base there knowledge on experience resulting in thefact that they do the same mistake wrong for over 30 years. Experience is indeed nothing if you don't criticise and analyse this experience, that is why surgeons are constant training and revising.

3. So farl now you failed to show that ALL schizophrenics are dangerous. You only poited out some are.

4. General believe here is not that there are no dangerous schizophrenics. We just dispute that ALL schizophrenics are and a few based on the links you provided.

5. The "fact" that schizophrenia is 300-400% higher under JW is based on a incorrect research over 40 years old. I still didn't say that it might or might not be true, I just like to see some proper scientific evidence for this claim, so far I have seen none.

All in all you proved nothing yet, except that I am right that you are biased when reading your own links, as you admited in above posted due to your own experiences.

In Holland the most crimes are commited by black people and North Africans. If I would follow your way of conclusions I would conclude that ALL black people and ALL North Africans are criminals. And yes this would be based on personal experience too. This doesn't make it correct though.
Last edited by Tulip1 on Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:51 am, edited 3 times in total.
Pope says atheists pick & choose their morals. Correct. Today I will be frowning on child abuse & not having a problem with homosexuality.
nozzferrahhtoo
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1140
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:17 am

Re: Jehovah's Wittnesses

Post by nozzferrahhtoo » Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:27 am

I know I pointed this out in my last post but it is worth reiterating due to the prevalence of the claim being made in the thread.

The % of Schizophrenics in homicide statistics is being used here to assume correlation, and alas the assumption of correlation is quite literally the only thing on offer by the user in question.

Again: All this tells you is the % of convictions and not the % of people actually committing such crimes. You can assume all day that this means that the % of those people committing the crimes are higher, but assumption is all it is. It could, as I have said, in fact have more to do with an increased inability on behalf of Schizophrenics to prevent being caught. Or an increased inability when caught for them to successfully defend themselves.

It could, for example, show us that convictions are higher because people like buzz here have a bias against them and assume they are dangerous. A jury put before a defendant that is mentality ill with a disease people inherently fear and are biased against would increase their willingness to convict.

These are only a couple of examples of what such a statistic COULD be telling us. I honestly do not know which it is, but thankfully I do not share the user above’s willingness to assume the explanation just happens to be the one that fits the argument I wish to make.

Where is the evidence and arguments showing the causation assumed from a correlation is the correct one however? It simply is not forthcoming… aside from a possibly false or invented little anecdote on the user’s personal experience which the user feels is somehow applicable when it is not.
CatHerder
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Jehovah's Wittnesses

Post by CatHerder » Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:06 pm

Buzz wrote:and if you people (or poeple) don't like it - stuff cheese
LOL... surely you mean tough cheese, can't even get that right.
inedifix
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:57 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Jehovah's Wittnesses

Post by inedifix » Tue Nov 09, 2010 1:06 am

funkyderek wrote:I was raised JW and some of my family are still involved. I don't normally find myself defending them, but the sort of nonsense Buzz posted deserves to be challenged.
Fair play to you for making it from JW to atheist. From a discussion with someone here in NZ who left the JWs (managing to take her youngest child with her) I have a tiny insight into the hard road you've probably travelled. Must be so tough where family are concerned. Good luck with it for the future.
“What we call chaos is just patterns we haven't recognized. What we call random is just patterns we can't decipher. What we can't understand we call nonsense. There is no free will. There are no variables. There is only the inevitable.” Chuck Palahniuk
inedifix
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:57 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: Jehovah's Wittnesses

Post by inedifix » Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:18 am

Buzz wrote:Read this again

Between 5 and 10% of homicides are done by Schizophrenics.
This may well be true, but considering the fact that the thrust of your argument is:
  • P1. Schizophrenics are dangerous
    P2. JW's have a 4 fold likelihood of being schizophrenic than the normal population
    Therefore: JW's should be stopped from door knocking people's houses.
You should probably consider the following...
  • - There have been 843 murders recorded in Ireland between 1951 and 2009.
    - According to your figures, up to 10% of the murderers are likely to have been Schizophrenic = 84 of them.
    - The ratio of Normal Population Schizophrenics to JW Schizophrenics is 306 to 1. Or 0.33%.
    - 0.33% of 84 = 0.28 Schizophrenic Jehovah's Witness murderers over the last 58 years.
In other words, in Ireland we can expect a Schizophrenic Jehovah's witness to commit murder roughly once every 174 years.

I hardly think this necessitates a change in the Irish legal system to outlaw Jehovah's Witnesses from knocking on people's doors. Do you?

Sources: CSO | National Crime Council
“What we call chaos is just patterns we haven't recognized. What we call random is just patterns we can't decipher. What we can't understand we call nonsense. There is no free will. There are no variables. There is only the inevitable.” Chuck Palahniuk
Davo
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:17 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Jehovah's Wittnesses

Post by Davo » Tue Nov 09, 2010 2:29 am

Buzz wrote: you make some good points.

I was instructed right from the start that schizophrenics are dangerous, and as I have shown, psychiatrists are killed by schizophrenics on a regular basis, I have also shown that between 5 and 10% of all homicides are done by schizophrenics. I have also shown that schizophrenics are highly likely to be violent.
Ciaran does make good points. Let's look at some of the stuff you are putting forward, it's biased in my opinion I want to see more holistics stats. For instance, what percentage of homicides are by depressed people? Does that make depressed people dangerous? What percentage of schizophrenics have done homicides, compared to say, married personages, or the homeless? Could marriage be dangerous? Is being homeless make you a dangerous person? I think you have presented stats that may be accurate, but in such a way as to blanket statement schizophrenics as dangerous, and that type of thinking can be dangerous in itself.

Check out :
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 084214.htm

"What the paper shows, more than anything else, is that the public fear of the mentally ill is completely misplaced" said Dr Large. "These events are so rare that they are almost impossible to study, yet the fear of serious violence by the mentally ill is a major cause of stigma".

In other words, what you are doing contributes to the stigma of people in this position, making it difficult for them to socialise and can move them into positions such as homelessness, drug use .. and violence.
I have shown these points a few times, but the popular belief in here that schizophrenics are harmless
Straw man, no one I can see has said that. Everyone is different and schizophrenics are all different. What you have done is presented statistics to push a certain position, ignoring other statistics in your presentation, and ignoring other aspects of the people involved as to what could have been the cause of the violence.
- even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, indicates to me that the holding on to a false belief in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is called delusion. And delusion is a symptom of schizophrenia.
Associating those that disagree with the presentation of statistical evidence you have made 'must be delusional' is poisoning the well via definition and circular reasoning. It is a logical fallacy, an error of reasoning and rings alarm bells for me when used in a discussion to further ones position.

The fact is you have provided biased statistics without specific contexts to formulate a position that others are saying is not yet proven. I'd say the same thing of someone saying 'married people are dangerous', 'the homeless are dangerous', 'bored teenagers are dangerous' ... 'the religious are dangerous' (hang on, that's what you ARE trying to say isn't it?)

I personally am not making a claim, I am questioning yours. That's healthy, nothing wrong with that.
The reality is, if I know someone is a schizophrenic, or I suspect as much, because of my experience, I know that the chances they will be violent is much higher than the general rate of the population.
Yea I have this feeling with homeless people, can't trust em. Let's just stigmatise them further. Don't give em jobs or such, push em out further as outcasts.

That will make the world a safer place. :roll:
The reality is, schizophrenia is a serious illness, and undiagnosed and unmedicated, schizophrenics are not to be taken lightly and there is no room for complacency.
So is depression, alcoholism, drug use etc etc. However this does not make all the people that have it dangerous. No one is saying you can be complacent, it takes care and understanding of a persons condition whatever it may be, depression, alcoholism, drug use etc .. marriage even, to avoid people falling to violence. This does not mean those people are dangerous.

Everyone could be dangerous, stigmatisation of individuals is a great way to do this. In fact, you could say stigmatisation of groups of people is dangerous.
Anyone who is around a schizophrenic, and is complacent, is a statistic waiting to happen. All Schizophrenics are to be wary of, to be watched, and never let your guard down around one, because you never know what they will do - and they are dangerous.
Conflating the two here is wrong, you can be aware of schizophrenia and understanding of the condition etc, this does not instantly make the schizophrenic dangerous. Some are only dangerous under certain conditions. You just blanket statement them all and that's a myopic view of the condition that leads to many of the issues that come from it ie: pushed out of social circles etc, which can lead to depression, alcoholism, drug use, etc other causes of violence across the board.

What methodology have you used to remove other such stimuli to violence from your statistics? Also considering each person is different?
That is the reality, and I have experienced it many times and because of my training and experience, in the health care industry, I keep a weather eye on schizophrenics regardless of any other factor - I just do not trust them.
Just as you would with anyone else with a mental illness, mild depression, easy to anger or gun owners, but this does not make them dangerous.
When between 5 and 10% of all homicides are pertetrated by schizophrenics, and schizophrenics are only a small number of the population, it boiled down to the fact that schizophrenics are dangerous - that is what I believe and will continue to believe.
Most homicides are caused by people that are related to the victim. Does this make our relatives dangerous?
This thread is about Jehovah's Witnesses, and the FACT that schizophrenia is 300 to 400% higher in that section of the community when compared to the general population.
Are the JW's in the stats born into it, or are they drawn to it? Consider the fact that stigmatisation of mental illness causing lonelyness can make people knocking on your door being friendly something to grab onto. (considering much of the causes of schizophrenia are genetic or prenatal) Or is it because of similar circumstances to other causes such as poverty, with the stigmatisation of JW's generally because they can be really really annoying people?

I would be interested in seeing a more in depth analysis than what is presented.
Now you can say what you like and think what you like, but to me that sets alarm bells ringing.
Schizophrenics are not to be trusted because over all they are dangerous. I stand by that statement and if you people (or poeple) don't like it - stuff cheese - good luck to you when you meet a schizophrenic.
I've met plenty, my partner is doing psychology as well, my folks are in the medical field with my mum a registered nurse that worked in the field. What is actually dangerous is people like yourself stigmatising the condition. I'm not saying at all 'no need to be careful', I am saying be vigilant and aware of the condition and the problems that come from it.

It's a vicious circle otherwise, and I see what you are doing as dangerous.
An explanation of Logical Fallacies : http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies ----- ferox deo vacuus vinco
Buzz
Posts: 151
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:35 am

Re: Jehovah's Wittnesses

Post by Buzz » Tue Nov 09, 2010 3:45 am

CatHerder wrote:
Buzz wrote:and if you people (or poeple) don't like it - stuff cheese
LOL... surely you mean tough cheese, can't even get that right.
Actually it was meant as a joke - as I am sure "poeple" was a typo - I put in a typo as a joke - thats me trying to be funny.

In Australia we say "Stiff Cheese".

I am sure Tough Cheese has the same intended meaning.
Post Reply