Jump to content

Talk:Ideas and delusions of reference/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

What?

what does solipsism have to do with ideas of reference? Can someone please explain.

  • Well, if you are convinced that you are the sole entity in the universe, you might consider that the world around you is fictitious and "made" for your own personal experiences. In this sense, it relates in that you would start to consider that every stimulus you encounter was specifically designed for your view - after all, if you're the only person in existence, why would these things need to be seen by anyone else? - Xvall
  • Well you said it, and thanks a lot. To continue that thought, "Ideas of reference" (although this article deals more with delusions of reference) may be a pathologized version of solipsism. I recently read an article called "Psychology as a Weapon" which hints that more than once, psychologists have used their analytical skills to denounce political or historical persons. The label "Ideas of Reference" has e.g. been used to denounce Wilhelm Reich. I wouldn't be wondering if a multitude of new mental illness descriptions would emerge from one single psychologic interview of a present day philosopher. -- Paniq 05:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

"Ideas of reference ... are an exaggerated form of self consciousness, usually driven by social anxiety."

It's true that two criteria for the diagnosis of Schizotypal Personality Disorder are ideas of reference and social anxiety; however, we cannot deduce that the former are "driven" by the latter. A citation is needed. Scott7261 (talk) 20:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

NPOV

This statement:

"Many religious propositions, particularly that God created the universe with them in mind"

Is an extremely common religious and philosophical viewpoint among a number of different groups. Such a belief isn't really in the same category as the other delusions of reference. I'm getting rid of this, as it seems to be some clever pseudointellectual asserting their viewpoint on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.171.228.85 (talk) 18:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC) Battaglia01 (talk) 18:48, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

"Many religious propositions, particularly that God created the universe with them in mind"
This is actually factual. Patients with schizophrenia often report that the actions of god are done with them in mind. See delusions. --Roastporkbun (talk) 06:41, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Include this

sometimes i feel like i am in a hidden reality show, that should be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.145.192.72 (talk) 20:47, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Spam?

Probably, E-mail spam can be included as example in this article? --Dennis714 (talk) 04:28, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Synchronicity

would a mention of synchronicity and apophenia be relevant in this article? --Andymussell 01:19, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

It is not even clear what the difference between apophenia and delusions of reference is. Should the two articles be merged? -Me, 5/7/08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.118.73.116 (talk) 09:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Just from looking at the articles, it seems to me that the difference is in the perceived "source" of this meaning about oneself. In ideas of reference, the source is other people (the people on the bus are talking about me, this person is trying to tell me something by crossing his legs, etc.). In apophenia (or "synchronicity" when viewed more positively), the source is some idea of destiny or Providence (I just saw 11:11 on a clock, that means something, God is trying to tell me something, etc.). Mbarbier (talk) 13:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Ideas of reference and religion

Shouldn't an idea of reference be false in order to qualify as psychotic? If "some supernatural being" does exist and is indeed "especially concerned with the individual, their family, tribe, or species," how is believing the proposition presently on the page a mental illness? Whether God exists and what He is are, shall we say, controversial questions. The atheists / non-Christian theists cannot simply call theists / Christians crazy and consider their work done. I mean, look, the questions of the existence of God and His attributes should be settled by philosophers not psychiatrists. Again, if an idea of reference seems obviously false, then a diagnosis of a disorder may be reasonable. But Smith's idea that he can call upon "some supernatural being" for help or guidance or grace surely cannot be called absurd, unless the psychiatrist harbors extreme prejudice against religion, itself a not-too-sane attitude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.135.60.233 (talk) 22:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

The article only says that ideas of reference are comparable to religious ideology, not that religious ideology is a necessary example of ideas of reference. No decisions are being handed down. Though, because religions commonly disagree about who is favored by a deity, then if any is right it stands to reason that whomever is wrong could be suffering from ideas of reference. --Dan Kuck (talk) 04:34, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Diagnosis of schizotypal personality disorder may involve a distinction between "ideas of reference" and "delusions of reference." The schizotypal patient feels as if nearby strangers are whispering about him. Later, he may realize his self-referential idea had been false; feelings of persecution may however linger. A schizophrenic patient with similar delusions of reference is more likely to persist in these thoughts, denying any possibility of paranoia.drone5 (talk) 08:17, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ideas of reference and delusions of reference. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:38, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

contrast with...

This article concerns cases (and gives many examples) where the subject perceives presumably meaningless or coincidental (contingent) aspects of the world, even humdrum everyday ones, as pregnant with meaning pertaining to themselves. A related, but quite distinct delusion would be where the subject believes that indeed every last detail of how things happen, is precisely so for some deep, hidden reason, which is simply hidden from the subject, and has nothing to do with the subject. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:F858:C989:565D:F121 (talk) 09:12, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ideas_and_delusions_of_reference/Archive_1&oldid=1224953246"