HOW COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AFFECT RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISTS William F. Doverspike, PhD drwilliamdoverspike.com 770-913-0506

Cognitive behavioral psychology is based on Cognitive behavioral forms of psychotherapy the premise that our feelings are largely are mainly practiced within the field of determined by our thoughts. To oversimplify, professional psychology. There have been few most forms of cognitive behavioral attempts to apply these concepts to the study of psychotherapy are based on the idea that we can religion. This article does not address the change how we feel by changing how we think. content of religious beliefs, but rather provides Thinking can be differentiated into content of a perspective of how processes of thought may thought (i.e., what we think about) and form, affect adherents of any religion. structure, or process of thought (i.e., how we think). Cognitive distortions are errors in the Absolutistic thinking occurs when a person’s process of thinking, which can then lead to beliefs, feelings, or opinions are equated with various fears, , and resentments. reality. The underlying belief is, “If I think it’s so, then it’s so.” This process involves an An important indicator that one or more errors egocentric assumption (largely “unconscious” in thinking may be operating is a person’s or outside of awareness) that one’s thoughts are degree of emotional distress or interpersonal in fact reality, often accompanied by the claim conflict. An important distinction can be made that others’ beliefs are not reality. In other between perceptions (i.e., what someone words, absolutistic thinkers equate their actually says or does in a specific situation that certainty with absolute truth. In contrast to can be seen or heard), inferences (i.e., how faith, which involves a balance of belief and someone interprets what is seen or heard in a doubt, absolutistic thinking involves a sense of specific situation based on one’s underlying certainty—which can give rise to absolute truth assumptions), and assumptions (i.e., the claims. Even the 16th century German underlying attitudes, core beliefs, or cognitive theologian and religious reformer Martin Luther schemata that provide a filter by which observed that, “Where there is great faith, there perceptions are interpreted). The basic is great doubt.” To an absolutistic thinker, cognitive equation is that, if we want to change however, doubt is the antithesis of faith. how we feel, we need to change how we think. The basic behavioral equation is that, if we Theologian Charles Kimball (2002, p. 41) want to change how we think, we need to describes one of the most pathological change how we act. In reality, people often act consequences of absolutism when it occurs their way into better thinking faster than they within a religion: “In every religion, truth think their way into better actions. claims constitute the foundation on which the entire structure rests. However, when particular Cognitive behavioral concepts have become interpretations of these claims become part of the public domain, which includes many propositions requiring uniform assent and are concepts and terms adapted from various treated as rigid doctrines, the likelihood of original sources including the writings of corruption in that tradition rises exponentially.” researchers and psychotherapists such as , Ph.D., Aaron T. Beck, M.D., Donald In his book, When Religion Becomes Evil, Meichenbaum, Ph.D., James P. McCullough, Kimball (2002) examines the role of religion in Ph.D., Martin Seligman, Ph.D., Marsha the world, with an emphasis on the conditions Linehan, Ph.D., and others. under which a religion (or parts of a religious COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 2 community) can deteriorate from its original Absolutist thinking can lead to disavowal of purpose. While emphasizing that religion is personal responsibility. Disavowal of personal basically necessary and positive, Kimball responsibility occurs when people attribute their describes five warning signs of how religion beliefs to an absolutistic source, and the source can become dangerous. One of these signs, becomes more authoritative when it is which he places first on his list, involves capitalized (e.g., “The Truth” in contrast to “my “absolute truth claims.” Truth”). In the three great world religions that are based largely upon sacred tests, for Every cult, sect, order, or denomination of example, an absolutist might say, “If my Book every religion has some adherents who are says it’s so, then it’s so.” This type of thinking inclined toward absolutistic rigidity. In other can sometimes lead to cognitive inflexibility words, no religion has a monopoly on rigidity, and rigidity. Within this context, no religious nor does any so-called secular belief system tradition has a monopoly on absolutism. (e.g., capitalism, communism, socialism, totalitarianism, secular humanism, and so on) Absolutism can also lead to theological have a shortage of rigid adherents. Absolutistic arrogance, which involves an absolutistic thinking is not confined to the philosophical or certainty—essentially the opposite of faith. A political right, left, or center. From a cognitive related but broader concept is particularism, perspective, absolutistic rigidity is more related which refers to an exclusive attachment to one’s to type of thinking than it is related to content own group, religion, nation, or political party. of thought. Religious particularism refers to the belief that one’s own faith is the only path to the With respect to early identification of experiencing, understanding, or worshiping of absolutists, one can begin with Regula Sancti the Transcendent—by whatever Name called. Benedicti, a book of precepts written in 516 by Another related concept is exceptionalism, Benedict of Nursia (c. 480–550 CE) for monks which is the perception or belief that a country, living communally under the authority of an society, institution, individual, or time period is abbot. In the first section of Chapter One of the “exceptional” (i.e., unusual or extraordinary). English translation of The Rule of St. Benedict, Exceptionalism carries with it the implication, Fry (1980, pp. 20-21) provides an account of whether specified or not, that the referent is the most detestable types of monks—described superior in some way. Religious or theological as the sarabaites: absolutism often involves both exceptionalism and particularism. Their law is what they like to do, whatever strikes their fancy. Anything Absolutistic, exclusivist, and particularistic they believe in and choose, they call thinking can converge in the form of holy; anything they dislike, they supersessionism (also known as replacement consider forbidden. (Rules 1.8-1.9) theology), in which one covenant supersedes or “replaces” another (usually later) covenant (see In more contemporary language, anything Charry, 2011). Regardless of its variant forms, absolutistic thinkers believe is named as truth; supersessionistic beliefs usually contain anything they don’t believe is condemned as elements of absolutistic, exclusivist, and heresy. By contrast, as observed by Kimball particularistic beliefs that are more (2002, p. 41), “Authentic religious truth claims characteristic of fundamentalistic traditions are never as inflexible and exclusive as some of than of traditions on the liberal, moderate, their zealous adherents insist.” progressive, or reform end of the continuum. COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 3

All-or-nothing thinking, which is less often Venice, Act 1, Scene 3), as an unflattering termed “all-or-none” thinking, is a form of description of the character Shylock's use of absolutistic thinking that occurs when a person Scripture. To guard against making arbitrary thinks in terms of “always,” “every,” or inferences, scriptural scholars strive to interpret “never.” We are all prone to slipping into ancient texts by using context (e.g., cultural, reductionist type of thinking from time to time, historical, linguistic). They avoid taking a verse partly because it simplifies information. At the out of context or arguing a position from one same time, all-or-none thinking reduces our verse or a handful of verses alone. To use an choices when we ignore exceptions, gradations, old adage, “Scripture interprets Scripture.” That and the middle ground. All-or-none thinking is is, the weight of one verse or one author’s a binary, bifurcated, or dualistic type of writings should be balanced against the weight thinking, often described as “black and white” of the whole of what Scripture teaches. thinking. In contrast, as most people have experienced, the wide array of colors in the real Attribution theory is a conceptual model world are much more complex than simply based on the idea that we attempt to understand shades of gray. To the binary thinker, the the behavior of others by attributing feelings, various shades of gray may feel too “fuzzy” for beliefs, and intentions to some other source comfort. From a psychological perspective, all- (i.e., usually to ourselves or to another person). or-none thinking is often associated with Attributions can be internal (attributed to self) personality traits such as inability or difficulty or external (attributed to others). In an external tolerating ambiguity, ambivalence, or (or situational) attribution, a person infers that uncertainty. another person’s behavior is due to situational factors. By contrast, in an internal attribution, Arbitrary inference involves drawing a we attribute some behavior or event to internal conclusion when evidence is lacking or factors within the other person (or within contrary to the conclusion. It can also involve ourselves). We have a tendency to attribute taking a single quotation or verse out of positive events to internal characteristics within context, while attributing a highly personalized ourselves, and we are more likely to attribute meaning to it. In scriptural exegesis, this negative events to external or situational factors process is known proof texting, which refers to outside of ourselves. For example, when bad the practice of taking a quotation or verse out- things happen to us, we attribute those events to of-context and then using it to support one’s others or to circumstances or forces outside own presuppositions, beliefs, or . Taken ourselves, whereas when good things happen to literally, a proof text (also known as a “proof- us, we attribute those events to the internal text”) refers to “a Scriptural passage adduced as traits of within ourselves. In other words, we proof for a theological doctrine, belief, or attribute positive outcomes to our own actions, principle” (Merriam-Webster, n.d.). As a form whereas we are more likely to attribute negative of arbitrary inference, proof texting might outcomes to circumstances or forces outside involve ignoring the cultural, historical, or ourselves. semantic context of a verse while giving an idiosyncratic or highly personalized If we attribute our desires and wishes to a deity, interpretation to the verse. It is sometimes then our own desires and wishes are easier to referred to as reading one’s own ideas into the justify. To carry the analogy further, if we Scripture (i.e., a type of confirmation ). attribute our wish-list to God—rather than to William Shakespeare wrote, “The devil can cite ourselves—then we run the risk of confusing Scripture for his purpose” (The Merchant of our will with God’s own will. In this sense, COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 4 petitionary prayer can be distorted into “not thy To some extent, binary thinking is involved in will, but My will be done.” When the fuel of the cultural or sociological process of othering, nationalistic fervor is added to the fire—and which refers to a reductionist labelling of a God always seems to be on “our” side—the war person, culture, or religion as belonging to the cry becomes, “Our will is God’s will.” Holy subordinate and intrinsically inferior category wars, whether they are accompanied by the of the Other. To otherize (in British patriotic flags of a government or the banners otherisation) involves making a person or of a religious Crusade, always seem to be the group of people seem different or to consider most unholy in their destructive power. them to be different. The practice of “othering” excludes people who do not fit the norm of the Binary thinking is another term for majority or prevailing social or religious group, dichotomous reasoning, which refers to all-or- which is some version of the Self. none thinking. It is also known as dualistic thinking, in contrast to holistic thinking (which The binary thinking style of othering is not only some writers term non-dualistic thinking, which a form of judging and prejudice, but it can also itself reflects dualistic categories). A binary be the foundation for anger, aggression, and thinker may use categories such as right-wrong, even violence. On both an individual saved-unsaved, saint-sinner, us-them, normal- psychological level as well as a communal abnormal, and so forth. It is not in only group level, the internal of religious fundamentalism, but in our world in and fear may underlie the more external actions general that is filled with binary thinking such ranging from religious indignation to religious as suffering and thriving, vulnerability and persecution and violence. According to spiritual resilience, unification and diversity, and so director Deborah Midkiff, MS, NCC, SD, “The forth. Spiritual truths usually involve paradox— problem is inherent in the process of excluding not one dimension or the other, but rather a based on differences rather than including blend of both and others. Optimal functioning based on similarities. Thus fear exists on both requires going beyond binary thinking. sides of the equation” (D. Midkiff, personal communication, June 22, 2021). Binary thinking is also expressed in the logical known as the false dilemma, also known As implied by author Mirabai Starr, a self- as the fallacy of false choices, in which described “Native New York Jew who grew up something is falsely claimed to be an in the counter-culture of New Mexico,” the “either/or” situation, when in fact there is at practice of othering violates the Abrahamic least one additional option. This type of tradition of “welcoming the stranger. Although bifurcated thinking usually takes the form of it did not make it onto the stone tablets, “Thou acknowledging only two options—one of which shalt not otherize is one of the pillars of the is usually extreme—from a continuum of Judeo-Christian traditions” (Starr, 2013, para. 2, possibilities. For example, “Either we accept emphasis original). the belief in ______, or we must no longer call ourselves religious.” The fallacy of At its worst, the process of othering can lead to the false dilemma is sometimes the result of a demonization, which involves the portrayal of habitual tendency, whatever the cause, to view some activity or group as immoral, wicked, or the world with limited sets of options. One threatening. Collective rationalizations are antidote for mutually exclusive “either-or” regularly constructed for acts of aggression thinking is a more inclusive “both-and” (Smith & Mackie, 2007, p. 513), based on thinking. exaltation of the in-group and demonization of COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 5 the opposite side or out-group. As the Gestalt example of bounded-set thinking, whereas psychotherapist Fritz Perls (1971, p. 9) diverse concepts such as purgation, expressed the idea, “Our own soldiers take care reincarnation, and unification have some of the poor families; the enemy rapes them.” In similarities to centered set thinking. Unless one the case of religion, this tendency to exalt is an absolutistic thinker, it is not a matter of ourselves and demonize the other can be whether one type of thinking is right and similarly expressed (e.g., our religion takes care another type is wrong (which is by definition a of the poor; the other religion exploits them). binary distinction), but rather it is that bounded- set type of thinking is more exclusive and In his book The Colonial Present, Derek centered-set thinking is more inclusive. In Gregory (2004), British academic and Professor religion, a bounded-set thinker may view of Geography at the University of British people as either A or B, whereas a centered-set Columbia in Vancouver, offers his critique of thinker may view people as moving toward C— the so-called “war on terror” in Afghanistan and or becoming more C-like. its extensions into Palestine and Iraq. Gregory traces the long history of British and American The principles of inclusiveness and involvements in the Middle East and shows exclusiveness also have implications in moral how colonial power continues to cast long psychology. One principle of moral psychology shadows that reach into the present. Gregory is that “morality binds and blinds.” As First provides a quote from cultural critic and Amendment attorney Greg Lukianoff and social Columbia University Professor of Literature, psychologist Jonathan Haidt, Ph.D. (2015, para. Edward Wadie (1935-2003): 12) point out, “Part of what we do when we make moral judgments is express allegiance to To build a conceptual framework a team. But that can interfere with our ability to around a notion of Us-versus-Them is, think critically. Acknowledging that the other in effect, to pretend that the principal side’s viewpoint has any merit is risky—your consideration is epistemological and teammates may see you as a traitor.” In the case natural—our civilization is known and of religious fundamentalism, traitors are often accepted, theirs is different and viewed as heretics—and punished accordingly. strange—whereas, in fact, the framework separating us from them is With specific reference to academic settings belligerent, constructed, and situational. such as college campuses, Lukianoff and Haidt (Gregory, 2004, p. 24) (2015, para. 5) use the term “protective vindictiveness” to refer to a movement to that In some ways, binary thinking is similar to the punishes anyone who interferes with the goal of mathematical concept of a bounded-set (i.e., turning college campuses into “safe spaces” in one is either inside or outside of a boundary or which “young adults are shielded from words set), as opposed to a centered-set (i.e., in which and ideas that make some uncomfortable.” one is moving closer to the center of a set). According to Lukianoff and Haidt vindictive Bounded-set thinkers can draw a circle that protectiveness creates “a culture in which keeps others out, whereas centered-set thinkers everyone must think twice before speaking up, can draw a larger circle that lets others in. lest they face charges of insensitivity, Whereas bounded-set thinking can involve an aggression, or worse” (2015, para. 5). “us-them” dichotomy, centered-set thinking can involve a “we” mentality. In thinking of an afterlife, heaven vs. hell beliefs would be an COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 6

Cognitive deficiency occurs when an important involves viewing situations as binary rather aspect of one’s life situation is disregarded, than multidimensional. Rather than seeing in dismissed, or ignored. The term does not refer color or even in shades of gray, dichotomous to a mental defect or intellectual disability, but thinking involves seeing in black and white. A rather it comes closer to the psychodynamic dichotomous thinker may view events as either concepts of , , or lack of sacred versus secular, which ignores the subtle awareness. While judging others harshly, a nuances of how some activities involve a blend cognitively deficient person might ignore his or or combination of the sacred and secular. In a her own self-righteous hypocrisy. Jesus of similar manner, a dichotomous thinker may see Nazareth condemned this type of exclusivism: others as either religious or not religious. Dichotomous thinkers who see others as You shut the door of the kingdom of Christian vs. Not Christian may also be inclined heaven in people’s faces. You to thinking of consequences such as Heaven vs. yourselves do not enter, nor will you let Hell. those enter who are trying to. (Matthew 23:13; New International Version) Religious fundamentalists do not have a monopoly on dichotomous reasoning, which Confirmation bias refers to the tendency to can also be seen in the artificial distinction interpret new data or evidence as confirmation between the so-called secular and the sacred. of one’s own pre-existing beliefs or theory. This type of thinking puts an emphasis on the Even the most objective scientific researchers exclusivity of sacred places, sacred times, must be continually on guard against seeing sacred actions, and even sacred persons. what they expect to see in the data. In the study Although such distinctions may help the of Scripture, eisegesis refers to the process of religiously observant pay attention to that interpreting Scripture in such a way as to which is sacred for them, the unfortunate introduce one’s own presuppositions, beliefs or consequence is that such exclusivity leaves the biases. As a form of confirmation bias, majority of life secular or un-sacred. Yet eisegesis involves reading into the text one’s throughout the centuries, there have been those own ideas, often as a way to “prove” one’s pre- who have seen the sacred in the ordinary conceived assumptions, beliefs, or opinions. experiences of life. A spiritually attuned person Eisegesis is best understood when contrasted does not have to go to sacred places to pray, with exegesis, which involves striving to wait for holy days for the holy to happen, or interpret a text’s meaning in accordance with engage in sacred actions for good to be done. the author’s context and discoverable meaning. We can pray always, anywhere, and at any In contrast, eisegesis is when a reader imposes time—just as we can pray at dawn, on our his or her own interpretation onto the text. knees, on our prayer mats, or before an altar. Whereas eisegesis is highly personalized and Everything that happens can be sacred if we subjective, exegesis tends to be objective. allow it to be. In the words of Austrian writer Perspective-taking, which involves striving to and philosopher Franz Kafka (1883-1924), understand a subject matter from the “Even the merest gesture is holy if it is filled perspective of the other person or an alternative with faith.” hypothesis, is one way to guard against confirmation. Literalism is not a term used by cognitive behavioral theorists, but rather it is a term used Dichotomous reasoning is another term for by various writers concerning scriptural or binary thinking or all-or-none-thinking. It textual interpretation. Because it serves as one COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 7 of the foundational pillars of religious related to the specific verses or texts that its fundamentalism, literalism deserves special adherents interpret literally. For example, there consideration. Literalism generally refers to an are some sacred texts or verses that are taken adherence to the exact letter or the literal literally, whereas there are verses that are meaning of a word or words, as opposed to a interpreted figuratively. Similarly, some figurative, metaphorical, or metaphysical religionists interpret all sacred texts as meaning. empirical, historical, and scientific truths, whereas other religionists interpret these same Although the term can be applied to any texts as reflecting ultimate truths (which some religion, literalism is more relevant to People of capitalize to reflect the Deity) regardless of the Book, an Islamic term that refers to Jews, whether they correspond to explicit historical Christians, and Sabians. The term is also used events or scientific information in the modern in Judaism to refer to the Jewish people and by sense of these terms. members of some Christian denominations to refer to themselves. Depending on one’s Within a specific religion such as Christianity, religion, a scriptural literalist could be an for example, there are some verses that some adherent to the Torah (particularly to the Book religionists take literally whereas others take of Leviticus), the Qur’an, or the King James figuratively or metaphorically: Bible (particularly the New Testament). For example, biblical literalism (or biblicism) is a John 10:7-8 (NIV)7 Therefore Jesus said term related specifically to biblical again, “Very truly I tell you, I am the interpretation. According to a 2011 Gallop poll, gate for the sheep. 8 All who have come 3 in 10 Americans interpret the Bible literally, before me are thieves and robbers, but saying it is the actual word of God, whereas the sheep have not listened to them. 49% of Americans say the Bible is the inspired word of God but that it should not be taken Similarly, there are some verses that literally (Jones, 2011, p. 1). Evangelical, Fundamentalists, and some Protestant Christians may take literally, Literalism refers to adherence to the exact letter whereas there are verses that are interpreted or the literal sense of scripture, in contrast to figuratively: allegorical, figurative, parabolic, or metaphorical interpretations (e.g., as seen in John 14:6 (NIV) has been interpreted allegories, figures of speech, parables, similes, literally: 6Jesus answered, “I am the way or metaphors). Literalism stands in contrast to and the truth and the life. No one comes historical-critical methods of interpretation, to the Father except through Me.” which investigate the origins of ancient texts in order to understand “the world behind the text” John 14:6 (NIV) has been interpreted (Soulen & Soulen, 2001, p. 78). Somewhat figuratively: 6Jesus answered, “I am the paradoxically, literalism does not necessarily way and the truth and the life. No one lead to complete agreement among literalists comes to the Father except through with regard to one single interpretation of any Me.” given passage or verse in sacred writings. Similarly, there are some verses that are taken literally by Roman Catholics and taken To some extent, different sects or figuratively by Protestants: denominations within a religion are in part COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 8

John 6:55-56 (NIV) has been interpreted sentence. The grammatical meaning of a literally: 55For My flesh is real food, and sentence is dependent on structural organization My blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats (also called syntax or syntactic structure or, in My flesh and drinks My blood remains written language, the mechanics of writing), in Me, and I in him.” whereas the deeper, intended, and underlying meaning of language is more dependent on John 6:55-56 (NIV) has been interpreted pragmatic language. In comparison, structural figuratively: 55For My flesh is real food, language conveys the surface meaning of and My blood is real drink. 56Whoever spoken language, whereas pragmatic language eats My flesh and drinks My blood carries the deeper meaning. In other words, remains in Me, and I in him.” structural language refers to what we say, and pragmatic language refers to how we say it. In writing about how literalism can become a tragic distortion of religion, psychologist and Although literalists are by no means people former Middle East reporter Lesley Hazleton with mental disorders, there are some people (2004, p. 112) describes some of the with mental disorders who have difficulty unfortunate consequences of fundamentalism: understanding the non-literal and non-verbal cues of pragmatic language. For example, By restricting itself to the most literal individuals who are impaired by a condition interpretation of poetic texts, it becomes known as social communication disorder suffer blind to the religious spirit. It becomes, from difficulty understanding affect, gestures, in fact, anti-religious. The sacred is and facial expressions in others’ non-verbal reduced to a set of legal strictures; awe language. As a result, they may have difficulty and mystery [are reduced] to obedience understanding the meaning of double-entendre, and . Lacking all sense of idiomatic phrases, humorous intentions, the poetic, fundamentalism hates metaphorical expressions, or hidden meaning paradox, and denies mystery. Enigma is (i.e., “reading between the lines”) in spoken anathema. It is religion made harsh, and language. Such individuals are often quite at the same time—why not be concrete and literal in their speech. As a result, paradoxical about it?—made bland. they may be more inclined toward literalism in other areas of their lives. Although not so much within the purview of cognitive behavioral theory, literalism is a Magnification occurs when the meaning of characteristic sometimes associated with some event or thing is exaggerated. Minor pragmatic language, which is more within the events are misconstrued to be major problems, purview of clinical and developmental such as “making a mountain out of a molehill.” psychology. Pragmatic language refers to the Jesus of Nazareth condemned the magnification social language skills that we use in our daily of the Pharisees (the predecessors of modern interactions with others. It includes context- religious fundamentalists): specific language (i.e., how appropriate our interactions are in a given situation) and non- They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads verbal communication (eye contact, facial and put them on other people’s expressions, body language etc.). Pragmatic shoulders, but they themselves are not language can be distinguished from structural willing to lift a finger to move them. language, which refers to the literal (Matthew 23:4; New International arrangement of words, phrases, and clauses in a Version). COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 9

As it relates to religion, magnification is a part them to be different. The practice of “othering” of how we may focus on the negative aspects of excludes people who do not fit the norm of the other religions or faith traditions different than majority or prevailing social or religious group, our own, whereas minimization is how we may which is some version of the Self. For more view the negative aspects of our own traditions. details, see the discussion of this topic listed under Binary Thinking. Mind reading occurs when a person believes that he or she knows the feelings, thoughts, or Overgeneralization occurs when a single beliefs of another person without asking the instance such as failure is viewed as a sign that other person. This type of cognitive distortion similar incidents will recur. This type of can reach theological significance when a thinking includes the use of words such as person claims to be able to read the mind of a “everybody,” “always,” or “never.” deity. Answers to petitionary prayer—also Overgeneralizations such as “you always” or known as giving God directions—can be “you never” can create also conflicts in attributed to a deity (i.e., a type of external relationships. In religion, overgeneralizing can attribution), particularly if the perceived lead to stereotyping others, which can lead to us answers to prayer are consistent with what a paying more attention to how we are different person already desires. rather than how we are similar to others.

Minimization occurs when major problems are Projection refers to the process by which we misconstrued as minor issues. This type of attribute our impulses, feelings, or motives to thinking occurs when one “doesn’t care” or others. In this sense, projection is related to when important issues “don’t matter,” or attribution theory, although the concept of “aren’t important.” This error in thinking may projection originated in psychoanalytic theory occur when a person focuses only on the as a defense mechanism in which we negative and minimizes the positive aspects of unconsciously attribute our unacceptable an interaction or situation. It may also occur in impulses onto others. The “unconscious” refers reverse, such as when a person minimizes his or to that which is outside of our awareness. her faults or shortcomings, while minimizing In a broad sense, projections can be negative or the other person’s virtues or strengths. As it positive. Our religious “enemies” may be those relates to religion, minimization is a part of how onto whom we project our own unacceptable we may devalue or minimize the positive impulses that we are not able or willing to aspects of other denominations or faith recognize within ourselves. On the other hand, traditions different than our own, and our religious “friends” may be those onto whom minimization is also how we may view the we project our idealized images of ourselves. negative aspects of our own traditions. In For example, what others tell us about God contrast, we may magnify the positive aspects usually tells us more about the person than it of our faith tradition while magnifying the tells us about God. Similarly, what we say negative aspects of other traditions. about God says more about us than it does about God. The , which is Othering refers to a reductionist labelling of a usually outside of our awareness, goes person, culture, or religion as belonging to the something like this: “If I can’t be more subordinate and intrinsically inferior category religious, then I’ll make my religion more like of the Other. To otherize (in British, me.” Right, or left, or in between, the Divine otherisation) involves making a person or always seems to reflect the same qualities as the group of people seem different or to consider COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 10 person who is talking about Him, or Her, or from a sacred text and then literalize the verse Them. in some generalized way without taking into consideration the original cultural context, the Proof-texting, which is also called intended audience, or even the original prooftexting, refers to the process of using languages from which the verse has been selective quotes from a document in order to translated. This practice is often referred to as “prove” one’s own attitudes or beliefs. It weaponizing scripture. similar what William Shakespeare observed in The Merchant of Venice (i.e., “The devil can Self-Other rating occurs when a person rates cite Scripture for his purpose”). A proof text is global worth, rather than traits, of oneself or a passage of scripture presented as proof for a others. It can also involve “comparing one’s theological belief, doctrine, practice, or insides to others’ outsides.” A self-other rating principle. Proof-texting is the practice of using is a form of overgeneralization, which can be a isolated, out-of-context quotations from a risk factor in the etiology of feelings of , document to establish a proposition in eisegesis. greed, , hostility, or feelings of Eisegesis is the process of interpreting a text in inadequacy. With respect to religions, it is such a way as to “prove” one’s own agenda, easier to compare the best of one’s own religion bias, or presupposition. It is a type of with the worst of another’s religion. Seeing confirmation bias commonly referred to as only the worst in other religions, “reading into the text.” Eisegesis can be denominations, or sects can perpetuate contrasted to exegesis, which is the process of stereotyped perceptions. drawing out a text’s meaning in accordance with the original author’s cultural, historical, In her book titled Holy Envy, Episcopal priest and linguistic context and discoverable Barbara Brown Taylor (2019, pp. 64-66), traces meaning. the phrase “holy envy” to Krister Stendahl (1921–2008), who was a Harvard professor, Prophesizing, which has also been described as Lutheran priest, and New Testament scholar. “fortune telling,” occurs when a person “tells After his tenure had ended as Professor and the future,” and then consequently acts in a later dean of the Harvard Divinity School, Dr. fashion that makes the prediction come true, Stendahl returned to his home in Sweden and in such as “I won’t succeed.” This type of thinking 1984 was elected Bishop of Stockholm in the is also called a “self-fulfilling prophesy.” Church of Sweden. Stendahl’s three rules of Confirmation bias can aid the process by religious understanding, which do not appear to allowing us to look back and selectively recall be sourced in any of his writings but clearly the facts and fictions that fit best with our attributed to him by others (see Landau, 2007), prophecy—a process known as prophetic are as follows: history. 1. When trying to understand another Selective abstraction occurs when we take a religion, you should ask the adherents of bit of information out of context and then that religion and not its enemies. generalize it into some global truth. For 2. Don’t compare your best to their worst. example, we might take a single event (such as 3. Leave room for holy envy. an unproductive day at school or at work) and interpret it in a more generalized manner According to Landau (2007), Stendahl’s use of (saying that we are an unproductive person). the term “holy envy” meant that we should be Similarly, a person might take a particular verse willing to recognize elements in another COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 11 religion or faith tradition, and find those straw man) easier to defeat in a debate. elements that we admire and wish we might According to the Beginner’s Guide to the Straw find in greater scope in our own religious Man Fallacy (2020), this logical fallacy gives tradition or faith. At the same time, argues the impression of refuting the other person’s Landau, not all religions are created equal. actual position. In reality, however, Person A From more than one point of view, a particular attacks an opinion, position, or view that their faith may be preferred above all others. opponent does not really hold. The distorted version of Person B’s claim may be taken out of Spiritual bypassing, sometimes called a context, focus only on a single aspect of the spiritual bypass, is a term coined in the 1980s original argument, or be only remotely related by John Welwood, Ph.D., a clinical to it. The distortions of the straw man fallacy psychologist, psychotherapist, and Buddhist can be applied to groups, denominations, and teacher. In the words of Welwood (2002), religions as well as individuals. As clinical spiritual by passing refers to “...using spiritual psychologist Rian E. McMullin, Ph.D. has ideas and practices to sidestep personal, observed, “Whatever their origins, can emotional ‘unfinished business,’ to shore up a take on a special life of their own when they are shaky sense of self, or to belittle basic needs, popularized in the media and become part of a feelings, and developmental tasks, all in the national credo (2000, p. 194). Unfortunately, name of enlightenment” (2002, p. 207). straw man arguments have become almost the Although it is a defense mechanism, it is not norm in contemporary political debates, necessarily unhealthy when it is used as a particularly as they may involve controversial temporary coping mechanism to deal with acute topics and societal concerns. stress or an intense “spiritual emergency.” On the other hand, when it is used as a long-term Thought-action fusion occurs when a person strategy for ignoring or suppressing believes that simply thinking about an action is unaddressed mental health problems, it can equivalent to engaging in the action. In its most result in maladaptive functioning that may severe form, thought-action fusion can be a risk include mental anxiety, emotional , factor for the development of obsessive- dichotomous thinking, obsession or addiction, compulsive disorder. In religion, specific spiritual , blind allegiance to obsessions and compulsions can vary according charismatic teachers, disregard for personal to the individual’s religion. For example, a responsibility, and a need to excessively control person might worry that he or she did not others and oneself (Picciotto, Fox, & Neto, perform a particular ritual correctly. The person 2017). might obsess about this for hours.

Straw Man argument is comprised of Because obsessions and compulsions can elements of cognitive distortion, over- become intertwined in an individual’s religious generalization, selective abstraction, and self- life, it may be difficult for the individual to other rating. Straw man argument, also known recognize that he or she may have a serious as the straw man fallacy, involves deliberately condition. A person with religious obsessions distorting an opponent’s position in an attempt may focus excessively on one particular—even to gain an advantage in an argument. It occurs minor—concern while neglecting other—often whenever someone substitutes an opposing major—aspects of the religion. For example, argument with a distorted, exaggerated, many religions place a high priority on misrepresented, or oversimplified version of it compassion and being a good neighbor to in order to make the opposing position (i.e., the others—especially the stranger. The scrupulous COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 12 individual may neglect this general idea while Conclusion focusing excessively on a few specific rules. This type of rule-bound religion can be a This essay contains mere thoughts—not precursor to scrupulosity, also known as a religious truths—about how some common religious form of obsessive-compulsive cognitive distortions or types of thinking can disorder. Scrupulosity involves pathological affect religious fundamentalism. Rather than anxiety and about religious matters. It focusing on the content of religious beliefs, involves personal distress, objective dogma, or doctrine, this article focuses more on dysfunction, and clinically significant the form, process, or style of thinking. The impairment in social and interpersonal ideas in this article are merely thoughts—not functioning. Scrupulosity is often viewed as a Ultimate Truth claims. Now that these thoughts form of idolatry because the excessive devotion have been expressed, they can be let go and to a specific ritual (to the detriment of good acts forgotten. With respect to further research, an toward other people) elevates the ritual to a equally noteworthy topic would be how god-like status. Ritualolatry refers to excessive cognitive distortions affect religious liberalism. devotion to specific rituals, whereas ecclesiolatry refers to excessive devotion to the institutional aspects of an organized religion, usually over and against the religion’s own beliefs or faith.

Bibliolatry is a more specific form of idolatry that involves adoration or worship of a book. As commonly defined, biblicists are people who typically interpret the Bible literally and use their interpretation of the Bible—and only the Bible—for their authority and source of knowledge, blindly holding to their interpretation to guide them through every situation and inform them on every issue. Religious adherents of text-based religions may be more susceptible to this form of idolatry, whereas adherents of ritual-based religions may be more prone toward ritualolatry (i.e., in which actions themselves become objects of worship). In contrast to these two forms of idolatry, rigid adherents to hierarchical religions—particularly those dominated by people of power, privilege, and prestige—are more prone to ecclesiolatry.

COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 13

References Bulletin, 35(1), 1. https://bulletin.hds.harvard.edu/articles/ Beginner’s guide to the straw man fallacy (with winter2007/interview-krister-stendahl examples). (2020). Fallacy in Logic. https://fallacyinlogic.com/straw-man- Lukianoff, G., & Haidt, J. (2015, September). fallacy-definition-and- The coddling of the American mind. examples/#Category The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/a Charry, E. T. (2011). Supersessionism. In J. B. rchive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the- Green, J. Lapsey, R. Miles, & A. american-mind/399356/ Verhey (Eds.). Dictionary of Scripture and Ethics. Ada, MI: Baker Academic. Lukianoff, G., & Haidt, J. (2018). The coddling of the American mind: How good Dag, E. A. (2017). Christian and Islamic intentions and bad ideas are setting up a theology of religions: A critical generation for failure. New York, NY: appraisal. New York, NY: Taylor & Penguin Press. Francis. [First published by Routledge, an imprint of Taylor & Francis Group] Means, S. (1903). Saint Paul and the Ante- Nicene Church: An Unwritten Chapter Eckstein, Y. (1984). What you should know of Church History. London: A & C about Jews and Judiasm. Waco, TX: Black. Available: Word Books. https://archive.org/details/saintpaulanda nt00meangoog/page/n202/mode/2up Fry, T. (Ed.). (1982). The rule of St. Benedict in English. Collegeville, MN: The Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Proof text. In Liturgical Press. Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved January 1, 2020, from Gregory, D. (2004). The colonial present: https://www.merriam- Afghanistan, Palestine, Iraq. Carlton, webster.com/dictionary/proof%20text Victoria, Australia: Blackwell Publishing. McMullin, R. E. (2000). The new handbook of techniques. (2nd ed.). Hazleton, Lesley. (2004). Mary: A flesh-and- New York, NY: W. W. Norton. See blood biography of the virgin mother. section on logical fallacies (pp. 194- New York, NY: Bloomsbury. 202).

Jones, J. M. (2011, July 8). In U.S., 3 in 10 say Perls, F. (1971). Gestalt theory verbatim. New they take the Bible literally. Gallup. York, NY: Bantam Books. https://news.gallup.com/poll/148427/say -bible-literally.aspx Picciotto, G., Fox, J., & Neto, F. (2017, December). A phenomenology of Kimball, C. (2002). When religion becomes spiritual bypass: Causes, consequences, evil. New York, NY: HarperCollins. and implications. Journal of Spirituality in Mental Health, 20(4), 333-354. Landau, Y. (2007, Winter). An interview with doi:10.1080/19349637.2017.1417756 Krister Stendahl. Harvard Divinity COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 14

Smith, E R., & Mackie, D. (2007). Social Divinity School, and a D.Min. from Hartford psychology (3rd ed.). Hove, UK: Seminary. Psychology Press. Barbara Brown Taylor is an American author, Soulen, R. N., & Soulen, R. K. (2001). Episcopal priest, Christian theologian, and one Handbook of biblical criticism (3rd ed., of the highest rated preachers in the U.S. She rev. and expanded ed.). Louisville, KY: later left parish ministry and became a full-time Westminster John Knox Press. professor at Piedmont College in Demorest, Georgia. She is an adjunct professor of Starr, M. (2013, August 08). Otherizing Christian spirituality at Columbia Theological HuffPost. Seminary in Decatur, Georgia. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/otherizi ng_b_3398754 Correct Citation for Reference Entry

Taylor, B. B. (2018). Holy envy: Finding God The reference entry correct citation styles for in the faith of others. New York, NY: this document are illustrated below. Students HarperCollins. should defer to the style preferences of their individual course instructors to determine Welwood, J. (2002, February 2). Toward a whether the course instructor has preferences psychology of awakening: Buddhism, that are more specific than those shown below: psychotherapy, and the path of personal and spiritual transformation. Boston, American Psychological Association MA: Shambhala Publications. Doverspike, W. F. (2016). How cognitive distortions affect religious fundamentalists. Notes http://drwilliamdoverspike.com/

Charles Kimball is a Professor in the Department of Religion at Wake Forest Chicago Manual of Style / Kate Turabian University and also an Adjunct Professor in the Wake Forest Divinity School. He is an ordained Doverspike, William, “How cognitive Baptist minister who received his Th.D. from distortions affect religious Harvard University in comparative religion fundamentalists,” September 21, 2016. with specialization in Islamic studies. He is an http://drwilliamdoverspike.com/ author of several articles and books about religion in the Middle East. Note: According to the Chicago Manual of Style, blog posts are typically not included in Yehezkel Landau is an adjunct professor at bibliographies, but can be cited in the running Boston College, a dual Israeli-American citizen, text and/or notes. However, if a blog is cited interfaith educator, and a consultant working to frequently, you may include it in the promote Jewish-Christian-Muslim engagement bibliography. and Israeli-Palestinian peacebuilding for more than 35 years. He received his A.B. from Modern Language Association Harvard University, an M.T.S. from Harvard COGNITIVE DISTORTIONS AND RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM 15

Doverspike, William F. “How cognitive distortions affect religious fundamentalists.” 21 Sept. 2016 [Date accessed]

Note: MLA guidelines assume that readers can track down most online sources by entering the author, title, or other identifying information in a search engine or a database. Consequently, MLA does not require a URL in citations for online sources such as websites. However, because some instructors still ask for it, check with them to determine whether they require it.

Copyright © 2016 by William F. Doverspike, Ph.D. Some content last updated 2021.

The correct citation for this article is Doverspike, W. F. (2016). How cognitive distortions affect religious fundamentalists. http://drwilliamdoverspike.com/