Not precisely; I associated it with epilepsy, brain damage, and psychosis.
Specifically, I was responding to AG's claim the "divine revelation" is a reliable source of knowledge. I pointed out that the "observer problem" exists in this case as well as all others. I used the examples of Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Baha'ullah, and a friend of mine who hears the BVM. I gave the prophets the benefit of the doubt with respect to their sincerity.
But the truth is, I don't know of any reliable way of distinguishing madness or epilepsy from "divine revelation" except to give the affected person medical treatment and see if it stops or not. The "known by their fruit" test seems to say that Mohammed was not revealing divine stuff but was mad or epileptic, but that Smith and Baha'ullah were in fact true prophets, because the Mormons and Bahai seem to be good people who respect their neighbors and worship their God. (Personally, I think Smith was quite mad; can't say about Baha'ullah)
That is a one-sided characterization because it fails to explain the beauty of Western Civilization.
I wasn't addressing the beauty of Western Civ., but here's my opinion.
There is very little of "divine revelation" that has made any difference to our civilization: St Paul and Constantine are the only two that come to mind (Mohammed too, in a way). Absent the former there would be no Christianity; that would certainly change civilization as we know it, but there's no way to say how. My guess is we'd still have Mithraism.
If Constantine had remained true to the faith of his fathers, again, things would be different, but it's impossible to say in what way. My guess is that we'd still have polytheism.
The worth of the individual is not a uniquely Western or Christian thought; Confucius was part-way there, and the Eastern Orthodox didn't go there at all. The technologcal inventions are also not uniquely western; printing, paper, and gunpowder came from China and zero from the Hindus. Trial by jury is from the pagan Germans. Limited governmant can be traced back to a bunch of power-hungry barons at Runnymeade.
There has been speculation that the reason technology took off in Europe and not China (or Rome) was the lack of strong central government to suppress it.
But my main point still stands: "divine revelation" had little to do with forming out civilization, compared to hard work, courage, inventiveness, and just plain luck.
Do you even care to? I simply say again that madness and epilepsy don't create a civilization.
I personally think Mormonism is loony, but as people go, I've never met a badly behaved Mormon. This is quite a contrast to my experience with people of other denominations. Perhaps my sample is not representitive.
They also have the only TV channel that plays good music.