AFAIK, all have flaws. The one's I've seen either don't have a large enough sample size, don't guard against placebo effects, don't control for degrees of care or severity of illness, and are never repeated.
Although an admitted skeptic, I have never had anyone satisfactorily explain the "effect of prayer" concept to me. Is it the duration, the intensity, the sincerity, or the number of people praying that matters? Can't just one, really sincere prayer cover you and your family for life, or do you have to do it regulary, like cardio work?
IMO, the whole concept of prayer is theologically whacked. Most theists will admit that God can't reveal his presence too overtly or free will is destroyed since everyone would stop what they are doing and worship the Big Guy. In the same breath they will tell you that prayer works.
So if you test prayer then God must natrually shrink away into the shadows so as not to be discovered. Screw the heart patients, God has to remain incognito.
i can't believe some of you actually pray that you'll win the lottery or your sports team wins a game. that's weak, shelfish and sad .
I hate it when coaches and players thank their respective lords for helping them win the game. JUST ONCE I'd like to see a coach or a player who loses say, "You know what? **** you god. Bastard. Asshole. I know we prayed harder than that other team of infidel athiest communists. Dammit you suck."
Actually I allways thought prayer was something the self righteous and pompous could poke fun at so they don't feel so insignificant... So I guess it does have a purpose after all.
I find it amusing that the very people to stand up and cry foul at the drop of a hat or at the slightest hint of any infringement of their rights are the first people to actively go out and infringe on the rights of people to belive in Religion.
No one said that we want to make prayer illegal. He is saying prayer is stupid and for the weak-minded. I don't see how such an opinion is infringing on any of your rights.
No one said that we want to make prayer illegal. He is saying prayer is stupid and for the weak-minded. I don't see how such an opinion is infringing on any of your rights.
NOBODY HAS A RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED!
Oh the memories. This calls to mind a post from my very first exchange with BR when I was a young, green AI'er:
Quote:
Originally posted by BR - March 24, 2003
....you have no right to not be offended. Why should your beliefs trump mine? Why does your faith deserve respect and consideration from me? I acknowledge that you believe what you believe and I cannot stop you from doing so. That is the extent of my duty to your faith. Period.
I did not show disrespect for your beliefs, only asked you to show some respect for mine.
You have the right to have your beliefs. You don't have the right to have other people respect them. I think prayer is silly and I will say so. I will not give it any respect simply because someone is offended.
I have developed a somewhat thicker skin since then. 8) As BRussell advised me at the time:
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
heh, if you're looking for respect and consideration for your opinions, perhaps an internet message board is not the place for you.
However, I do still think that it is possible to criticize prayer - or religion in general - without being disrespectful of it. Religous tolerance is an important value. It includes showing respect for athiests and well as those who believe. I can't remember any of the religious types here on AO saying that atheism or agnosticism is "silly".
On the other hand, I suppose that you would argue that if you really don't feel any respect, then it is best not to pretend that you do...and I have come to look forward to giving responses to your religious threads.
"Positive agnosticism"????? Sounds like a contradiction in terms.
Those who aren't sure a higher power exists so they believe in a general one to cover their bases.
This is opposed to negative agnosticism which is different from atheism in the fact that they simply choose not to believe in any god until evidence is presented. It's the most logical of beliefs. I don't believe in pink elephants floating over my house until I have some concrete evidence that they exist. Similar concept.
Quote:
Question: What belief, or lack of belief, is not silly in your view? I do not mean that rhetorically...I'm actually curious.
I find pretty much every belief silly. I find the focus on beliefs silly.
Those who aren't sure a higher power exists so they believe in a general one to cover their bases.
This is opposed to negative agnosticism which is different from atheism in the fact that they simply choose not to believe in any god until evidence is presented. It's the most logical of beliefs. I don't believe in pink elephants floating over my house until I have some concrete evidence that they exist. Similar concept.
I find pretty much every belief silly. I find the focus on beliefs silly.
I find pretty much every belief silly. I find the focus on beliefs silly.
I embrace uncertainty.
I just want to see if I have got it right:
You feel that there may be a God, or not, but you find that that focusing on whether or not you believe in Him, Her or It is silly because, in fact, you can never know.
No insult intended, but this seems a curious viewpoint of someone who actually posts quite often on religious matters.
You feel that there may be a God, or not, but you find that that focusing on whether or not you believe in Him, Her or It is silly because, in fact, you can never know.
No insult intended, but this seems a curious viewpoint of someone who actually posts quite often on religious matters.
I think it is a waste of time pondering whether or not a god exists when we have the capacity to develop new technology to look out to the stars and find out what the hell is really out there.
Comments
Originally posted by burningwheel
it's just one study. lots of others say it helps
AFAIK, all have flaws. The one's I've seen either don't have a large enough sample size, don't guard against placebo effects, don't control for degrees of care or severity of illness, and are never repeated.
Although an admitted skeptic, I have never had anyone satisfactorily explain the "effect of prayer" concept to me. Is it the duration, the intensity, the sincerity, or the number of people praying that matters? Can't just one, really sincere prayer cover you and your family for life, or do you have to do it regulary, like cardio work?
IMO, the whole concept of prayer is theologically whacked. Most theists will admit that God can't reveal his presence too overtly or free will is destroyed since everyone would stop what they are doing and worship the Big Guy. In the same breath they will tell you that prayer works.
So if you test prayer then God must natrually shrink away into the shadows so as not to be discovered. Screw the heart patients, God has to remain incognito.
Originally posted by burningwheel
it's just one study. lots of others say it helps
i can't believe some of you actually pray that you'll win the lottery or your sports team wins a game. that's weak, shelfish and sad .
I hate it when coaches and players thank their respective lords for helping them win the game. JUST ONCE I'd like to see a coach or a player who loses say, "You know what? **** you god. Bastard. Asshole. I know we prayed harder than that other team of infidel athiest communists. Dammit you suck."
Originally posted by EMGeneratr
Actually I allways thought prayer was something the self righteous and pompous could poke fun at so they don't feel so insignificant... So I guess it does have a purpose after all.
I find it amusing that the very people to stand up and cry foul at the drop of a hat or at the slightest hint of any infringement of their rights are the first people to actively go out and infringe on the rights of people to belive in Religion.
No one said that we want to make prayer illegal. He is saying prayer is stupid and for the weak-minded. I don't see how such an opinion is infringing on any of your rights.
NOBODY HAS A RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED!
Originally posted by BR
No one said that we want to make prayer illegal. He is saying prayer is stupid and for the weak-minded. I don't see how such an opinion is infringing on any of your rights.
NOBODY HAS A RIGHT NOT TO BE OFFENDED!
Oh the memories. This calls to mind a post from my very first exchange with BR when I was a young, green AI'er:
Originally posted by BR - March 24, 2003
....you have no right to not be offended. Why should your beliefs trump mine? Why does your faith deserve respect and consideration from me? I acknowledge that you believe what you believe and I cannot stop you from doing so. That is the extent of my duty to your faith. Period.
Full thread
Quote from The Chinnster:
I did not show disrespect for your beliefs, only asked you to show some respect for mine.
You have the right to have your beliefs. You don't have the right to have other people respect them. I think prayer is silly and I will say so. I will not give it any respect simply because someone is offended.
I also like veal.
Originally posted by BR
Since we are dredging up memories...
I have developed a somewhat thicker skin since then. 8) As BRussell advised me at the time:
Originally posted by BRussell
heh, if you're looking for respect and consideration for your opinions, perhaps an internet message board is not the place for you.
However, I do still think that it is possible to criticize prayer - or religion in general - without being disrespectful of it. Religous tolerance is an important value. It includes showing respect for athiests and well as those who believe. I can't remember any of the religious types here on AO saying that atheism or agnosticism is "silly".
On the other hand, I suppose that you would argue that if you really don't feel any respect, then it is best not to pretend that you do...and I have come to look forward to giving responses to your religious threads.
Originally posted by BR
Atheism and positive agnosticism are both silly.
"Positive agnosticism"????? Sounds like a contradiction in terms.
Question: What belief, or lack of belief, is not silly in your view? I do not mean that rhetorically...I'm actually curious.
Originally posted by Chinney
"Positive agnosticism"????? Sounds like a contradiction in terms.
Those who aren't sure a higher power exists so they believe in a general one to cover their bases.
This is opposed to negative agnosticism which is different from atheism in the fact that they simply choose not to believe in any god until evidence is presented. It's the most logical of beliefs. I don't believe in pink elephants floating over my house until I have some concrete evidence that they exist. Similar concept.
Question: What belief, or lack of belief, is not silly in your view? I do not mean that rhetorically...I'm actually curious.
I find pretty much every belief silly. I find the focus on beliefs silly.
I embrace uncertainty.
Originally posted by BR
I don't believe in pink elephants floating over my house until I have some concrete evidence that they exist.
But do you believe in grey elephants in Kenya? Similar concept.
Originally posted by BR
Those who aren't sure a higher power exists so they believe in a general one to cover their bases.
This is opposed to negative agnosticism which is different from atheism in the fact that they simply choose not to believe in any god until evidence is presented. It's the most logical of beliefs. I don't believe in pink elephants floating over my house until I have some concrete evidence that they exist. Similar concept.
I find pretty much every belief silly. I find the focus on beliefs silly.
I embrace uncertainty.
something here is reminding me of 'life of pi'
Originally posted by BR
I find pretty much every belief silly. I find the focus on beliefs silly.
I embrace uncertainty.
I just want to see if I have got it right:
You feel that there may be a God, or not, but you find that that focusing on whether or not you believe in Him, Her or It is silly because, in fact, you can never know.
No insult intended, but this seems a curious viewpoint of someone who actually posts quite often on religious matters.
Originally posted by Chinney
I just want to see if I have got it right:
You feel that there may be a God, or not, but you find that that focusing on whether or not you believe in Him, Her or It is silly because, in fact, you can never know.
No insult intended, but this seems a curious viewpoint of someone who actually posts quite often on religious matters.
I think it is a waste of time pondering whether or not a god exists when we have the capacity to develop new technology to look out to the stars and find out what the hell is really out there.