Originally posted by Devil King
you mean a "smart ass answer"?
Sorry, my bad...it was supposed to read like this:
"10?
What does that have to do with me answering a "choice" question with a "yes"?
is it because I am married?"
In other words, my "yes" was a smart ass answer. I was supposed to chose one of two scenarios and instead I answered "yes".
Edit- EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
Originally posted by Devil King
You can't possibly be calling people who place their faith in divine intervention over a cold more important than a person realizing they have to take care of themslves, can you?Which party serves the other; God or the people?
1. Dadudemon was using the expression "I can't believe..." which does not actually indicate a lack of belief.
2. More people dying from not getting medical treatment (instead of praying) is obvious.
It wasn't an attack on my part; I was just a little confused. Also, the flames run high whenever dadudemon posts.
Originally posted by dadudemonWell, I suppose you are correct if you think that either God or the people serve the other.
Sorry, my bad...it was supposed to read like this:"10?
What does that have to do with me answering a "choice" question with a "yes"?
is it because I am married?"
In other words, my "yes" was a smart ass answer. I was supposed to chose one of two scenarios and instead I answered "yes".
Edit- EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
It was a bitchy post with an obvious statement.1. Dadudemon was using the expression "I can't believe..." which does not actually indicate a lack of belief.
2. More people dying from not getting medical treatment (instead of praying) is obvious.
It wasn't an attack on my part; I was just a little confused. Also, the flames run high whenever dadudemon posts.
I prayed yesterday, which was the same as hoping it wasn't so.
How many prayers are said every day? How many do you say in a month sith? You work in a church, how much do people pray? Do you think it is possible that things like the stuff you said happens, and someone prayed and God didn't intervene? Like, he knew it was going to turn out well anyways, and just left it? If it is possible, do you think God would still get the credit from the person that prayed?
Originally posted by Bardock42
How many prayers are said every day? How many do you say in a month sith? You work in a church, how much do people pray? Do you think it is possible that things like the stuff you said happens, and someone prayed and God didn't intervene? Like, he knew it was going to turn out well anyways, and just left it? If it is possible, do you think God would still get the credit from the person that prayed?
Maybe if he saved his receipt?
The more sobering conclusions when it comes to prayer is simply that it's an inevitability that many will be "answered" (i.e. the outcome will be what was prayed for, regardless of deity).
This is why the opening post's comments that downplay "coincidence" are sadly misinformed. Pray for a hundred thousand things (not outlandish for, say, a national output of prayers per day) and statistical certainty ensures that a fair number of them will be "answered" (again, I use quotations because no literal answer needs to happen). Calling it coincidence at all is to misunderstand the concept, and also the level of predictability of such outcomes.
But people tend to remember hits and forget the misses. So we see miraculous Jesus cures in the media, or propagated through anecdotal sources (Chicken Soup books, email forwards, internet forums, word of mouth, etc.) and used as evidence. But no one bothers to print the statistics of failed prayers, or even in cases like this the percentages of misdiagnoses. A religious answer suffices for most people, rather than empirically investigating the situation.
So if you're religious and looking for confirmation of such beliefs, you get the "Look at all the prayers that are answered!" rather than realizing that it would be a bigger miracle if none of them were, simply because the law of averages ensures that many will. It's sobering to realize that to a person who understands the facts correctly, you would have an easier time convincing him/her of divine intervention if no one was ever saved by prayer.
It's the same confirmation bias used by psychics, afterlife mediums, and paranormal occultists that rely on the credulity of the general public for such things.
...
Then there's the matter of evidence. People can believe what they will, but if there is intervention of some sort, it doesn't remain fully transcendent to our reality...for God to intervene there needs to be a physical outcome. Which is testable. So far, no evidence has ever been found of such intervention, which is why such stories remain just that: stories. Not evidence.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
The more sobering conclusions when it comes to prayer is simply that it's an inevitability that many will be "answered" (i.e. the outcome will be what was prayed for, regardless of deity).This is why the opening post's comments that downplay "coincidence" are sadly misinformed. Pray for a hundred thousand things (not outlandish for, say, a national output of prayers per day) and statistical certainty ensures that a fair number of them will be "answered" (again, I use quotations because no literal answer needs to happen). Calling it coincidence at all is to misunderstand the concept, and also the level of predictability of such outcomes.
But people tend to remember hits and forget the misses. So we see miraculous Jesus cures in the media, or propagated through anecdotal sources (Chicken Soup books, email forwards, internet forums, word of mouth, etc.) and used as evidence. But no one bothers to print the statistics of failed prayers, or even in cases like this the percentages of misdiagnoses. A religious answer suffices for most people, rather than empirically investigating the situation.
So if you're religious and looking for confirmation of such beliefs, you get the "Look at all the prayers that are answered!" rather than realizing that it would be a bigger miracle if none of them were, simply because the law of averages ensures that many will. It's sobering to realize that to a person who understands the facts correctly, you would have an easier time convincing him/her of divine intervention if no one was ever saved by prayer.
It's the same confirmation bias used by psychics, afterlife mediums, and paranormal occultists that rely on the credulity of the general public for such things.
...
Then there's the matter of evidence. People can believe what they will, but if there is intervention of some sort, it doesn't remain fully transcendent to our reality...for God to intervene there needs to be a physical outcome. Which is testable. So far, no evidence has ever been found of such intervention, which is why such stories remain just that: stories. Not evidence.
However, prayer can be a strong force in a person’s life, as long as they do not fall into the delusion of thinking that some outside power is listening. Prayer is a way of setting our personal priorities.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
However, prayer can be a strong force in a person’s life, as long as they do not fall into the delusion of thinking that some outside power is listening. Prayer is a way of setting our personal priorities.
True, but that's an entirely different sort of prayer, and wasn't really the focus of my critique. Prayer, meditative exercises, or just quiet down-time for relaxation can be worthwhile endeavors, but the religious import attached to them often leads people to make false conclusions about prayer, which is where my problem lies.
It's like alternative medicine. Advocates love pointing out the documented healing properties of relaxation techniques, which is entirely valid. Reduced stress is know to aid traditional medical practice. But then they use it to push their own brand of snake oil that goes beyond documented science. Acupuncture, aroma or music therapy, herbal supplements, homeopathic remedies, crystal or magnet healing, all fall into this category. At best, they have similar effects to regular meditation or a massage, and are otherwise a placebo. At worst, they actually have negative affects.
The same can be said of prayer. At best, a spiritual placebo. At worst, people refusing medical treatment because "God heals." The perceived answered prayers are essentially analogous to a placebo affect, where the person is reading further into the conclusions than the evidence warrants. But any claims of divine intervention tacitly support such thinking, so even people who wouldn't deny medical care are still helping to provide the basis upon which the harmful consequences of prayer happen.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
True, but that's an entirely different sort of prayer, and wasn't really the focus of my critique. Prayer, meditative exercises, or just quiet down-time for relaxation can be worthwhile endeavors, but the religious import attached to them often leads people to make false conclusions about prayer, which is where my problem lies.It's like alternative medicine. Advocates love pointing out the documented healing properties of relaxation techniques, which is entirely valid. Reduced stress is know to aid traditional medical practice. But then they use it to push their own brand of snake oil that goes beyond documented science. Acupuncture, aroma or music therapy, herbal supplements, homeopathic remedies, crystal or magnet healing, all fall into this category. At best, they have similar effects to regular meditation or a massage, and are otherwise a placebo. At worst, they actually have negative affects.
The same can be said of prayer. At best, a spiritual placebo. At worst, people refusing medical treatment because "God heals." The perceived answered prayers are essentially analogous to a placebo affect, where the person is reading further into the conclusions than the evidence warrants. But any claims of divine intervention tacitly support such thinking, so even people who wouldn't deny medical care are still helping to provide the basis upon which the harmful consequences of prayer happen.
I realize it was not your focus, but I just had to butt in.
I heard a Doctor one time say that he was surprised that other doctors were so upset about the placebo effect. As long as you don't take it to a point where it can be harmful, like you said about, it can be the best medicine. The person gets better, and there are no side effects.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I realize it was not your focus, but I just had to butt in.I heard a Doctor one time say that he was surprised that other doctors were so upset about the placebo effect. As long as you don't take it to a point where it can be harmful, like you said about, it can be the best medicine. The person gets better, and there are no side effects.
The problem lies in the fact that placebos generally only work when people literally believe they are being cured by the placebo...in other words, they aren't aware of it. This ignorance leads to taking the ideas too far, which many of the things I listed in my last post would fall into. At that point, it becomes a money-making scheme that exploits peoples' credulity and sometimes even has negative consequences.
So the doctor was partially right. The placebo effect isn't harmful in and of itself, but his view of the situation was too limited to see the more real dangers.