Does prayer work?

[Sententia]

He didn't say that it's untrue that prayer works. He said that anyone with an ounce of sense would realize that it doesn't work. No matter how you try to spin that, it's saying that people who believe in prayer are lacking in even an ounce of sense. In my neck of the woods, that translates as stupid.

(I notice that BX's windy response to me simply reiterates his assertion that prayer does not work, without addressing the fact that he called those who think otherwise stupid.)

As for your "factual assertion," it's an assertion.

And your lack of response to me means what exactly?

I will happily argue the point with you. I think I made it abundantly clear that you cant pray for world peace tomorrow and presto tomorrow the world is at peace. No one would argue such... So define your argument mate...

 

[Sui]

Then the first thing you need to know is that science is not a subject; it's a method. Scientists in effect agree to accept the outcome of their research, whatever it may be, as long as the scientific method is correctly applied.

Sure, I agree. I do not disagree with the methodology. I specifically stated that I am not accusing the scientists of cheating. It's the definitive way the conclusions of the research are stated that I reject.

Why not? If people in fact did recover after being prayed for, wouldn't we be able to observe this?

Sure, to an extent. I don't believe any conclusions in this field are reliable because I see no logical way of correctly incorporating the spirit of prayer into experiments.

Oh, I thought you embraced science. But when it gives results that disagree with your prior conceptions (your "faith") then you disregard them? That's not embracing science, it's the opposite. Remember, to do science you have to first agree to accept the outcome, whether it is in accord with your faith or not. So you do not embrace science, you reject it.

So, I reject science because it contradicts my faith? Interesting assumption, but not accurate. As I stated before, I don't believe the science here is wrong. I just do not see it as fully credible because scientific knowledge is limited whereas God and prayer are not.

Why not? What was wrong with their methodology? That is the only permissible scientific critique. You have to show something wrong with the method; because to do science, you promise to accept the outcome, if the methodology is good.

Again: their methodology is not in question here. The research is based on the most advanced scientific thought available for this field at the time and that's all that can be done. I accept the outcome based on the limited knowledge. But again and again: the spirit of prayer is immeasurable. You can't just say "it works" or "it doesn't work".

It doesn't. They both come out the same. That's the result of this (and many other) studies.

As I recall, you told me many posts ago that any successful outcomes have only been achieved through cheating, which implies that the genuine studies always come out negatively. Something based on chance cannot always have the same general outcome.

This is where you go wrong. No matter who adds up 1 + 1, or what their judgment is, if they know how to add, they always get 2. Same with logic. A is never -A, no matter what your bias is. If you get that result, you're just doing it wrong. If A then B, and if B then C, then if A then C, regardless of individual bias.

Going wrong is comparing the brilliant complexity of the human mind to numbers and letters which do not have the ability to change from their patterns, as they cannot exercise reason.

No, it doesn't. According to you, it's heads you win, tails I lose. If the experiment detects an effect of prayer, then prayer works. If it doesn't, then prayer works. That's not the way science works. When the results come back that the prayer had no effect, it just means that prayer had no effect. Note: this is not one, outlying, biased study. This is a definitive, large, sound study by a religious group. They were hoping and expecting to find the opposite of what they did.

Prayer working is my belief and I've stated there is no credible scientific evidence to prove that it's effective, just as there is no credible scientific to prove that it isn't effective. This field is at a dead end.

We're not trying to measure God. God is outside of the scope of science. We're trying to measure the effectiveness of prayer. If it is actually effective, we would observe the effect, right? In what sense can you say that prayer is effective, but we can't observe the effect?

God is not outside of the scope of science, especially when trying to measure of prayer. God is the origin of prayer's effectiveness, so how can this study be conducted without measuring God?

The effectiveness of prayer can be observed on a physiological level...what about the psychological, social, or emotional results of the person being prayed for?

No, the exact same number as if you had not prayed at all are pretty well guaranteed to be granted. Prayer, by coincidence, is exactly as effective as not praying. We call that "no effect."

So, for example I pray for my uncle over in Iraq and I pray that he remain strong, determined, and in good health. Then suppose he returns mentally strong, determined, and in good health in every way. According to you, that would be chance, right? With what scientific evidence? There is none.

Why not? Becuase of your preconcieved "faith", bias against results you don't like? That's called dishonesty. If the results had come back the opposite, and the methodology was sound, I would be conceding that prayer works. That's because I'm honest. Oh well I know it. There is none so blind as he who will not see.

I've addressed this issue and your assumptions above. You're honest, I'm honest, let's just be nice here.

Nope. We have no idea how aspirin works; but we can measure that it does.

Exactly, you can measure that it does. The elements that physically make up aspirin are known, therefore scientific conclusions can be sought with credibility.

Like what? Again, if the study indicated that it worked, wouldn't you be citing it as evidence that it did? That's called "cheating."

Unknowns: God, spirit of prayer, how God and the spirit of prayer relate to each other, etc. If scientists want to truly and correctly measure prayer, all aspects must be included, even the ones you reject.

But you said you believe things without evidence. You're the one calling that "stupid," not me.

Misinterpretation of my words. I called the physical act of sticking my hand into fire "stupid", not the act of believing in things without evidence. I said there was a difference between the two, so calling one stupid would not correlate to calling the other stupid as well.

Why not? If prayer is effective, why can't science detect that effect? Is it an imaginary effect?

Not imaginary, just misunderstood by some who don't believe in it.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I do disagree, and my post in response to the OP should make it obvious why.

To me, prayer is not "asking God for stuff." It is a spiritual practice - an act of humility that transforms oneself, not God (altho since I believe that we are all a part of God, it does that too).

Thanks for your response. Sorry I missed your original reply to the OP.

I certainly agree with you that spiritual practices of introspection, meditation, quiet reflection, etc. have a positive effect on the individuals who practice those things, including when they are directed to some conception of God. I used to pray and sing thanks to God and I experienced the occasional euphoric or calming effects of these practices. That's why I liked going to church. (Now I just practice thoughtful introspection (or try to), but the point is the same.)

But that's really not the relevant issue, and it wasn't quite what I was asking.

The real point of disagreement or confusion is whether or not a prayer affects, as I said in my previous post, the course of events in the world--that is, the world outside of the minds of the individuals practicing prayer. All of our thoughts and behaviors, whether it's praying or jogging or anything else, affect us psychologically and socially. That's worth repeating: All of our thoughts and behaviors affect us psychologically and socially. No one is disputing that, as far as I know.

Yet there are a disturbingly large number of people in this country who think that prayers *really* work: that prayers functions as communications which go out somewhere and are heard by someone in authority over the universe, and He may be moved, if our prayers are numerous or sincere or worthy enough, to make changes to the natural course of events in our favor--sometimes even against the interests of others (an enemy during wartime, say). It is similar to how lots of sincere, enthusiastic letters to your Mayor might influence the operation of your city, only in this case there is no reality check: if the letters to the Mayor don't bring about tax reform, at some point you realize a new course of action is required, or that it simply isn't gonna happen and you learn to accept the unchangeable. But prayers are always assumed to work, even when they manifestly do not work, so it can be a perpetual source of wasted time and effort, false hope and false assurance.

I'm thinking of the gay fundamentalist Christian trying to "pray the gay away", the radio- and tel-evangelists making false promises, recounting stories of how poor people prayed as instructed and received a $40,000 pay raise and now they're out of credit card debt...I'm perhaps thinking even our President, praying for peace in Iraq and knowing that if he just pursues the original goals and prays hard enough, and gets enough prayers from fellow Americans, things will work out. There is no consideration that, perhaps, some goals are impossible and we need to re-prioritize.

Surely progressives like you and me--whether religious or not--reject that prayer works in that way. And surely we can agree that the belief it does work that way causes great harm.

Unfortunately i.m.o., the clearly wrong and harmful belief that prayer actually does work is sheltered from criticism and reinforced by many educated religious liberals in our country, who give sermons and write Op-eds claiming prayer works without pointing out what they know perfectly well to be true: that their definition of "works" isn't being disputed by anyone, and is fundamentally different and watered-down from the widespread, harmful notion that prayer *really* works.

 

[lilithu]

The real point of disagreement or confusion is whether or not a prayer affects, as I said in my previous post, the course of events in the world--that is, the world outside of the minds of the individuals practicing prayer.

If you change yourself for the better then you change the world for the better.

I believe in interdependency. In fact, I believe that's not just a "faith statement" but an assertion of the obvious. Everything in the world is interdependent. This breaking down into "outside" and "inside" is illusion. You don't know how changing yourself for the better might affect your neighbor who then might affect his niece who then might affect her teacher who then might affect her wealthy cousin who will then donate the money for the community center that you had been praying for. Neither one of us knows.

But I do know that if you change yourself for the better then you change the world for the better.


As for the rest of your post, you've changed the argument from "does it work?" to "is it bad?" That's fine, since I think that's the true motivation of this thread. "Does it work" retains a thin veneer of "objectivity."

You see something that you dislike as inherently harmful, as opposed to, like most things, being something that can either harm or benefit depending on how it's used. You appeal to "progressives like you and me." Progressives like me try to maximize freedom and diversity while balancing that out with justice. We accept that even if people believe differently from us, that is a good thing. Thus we do not attack things that are simply different, but only if they are truly hurting people. Homophobia and heterosexism, yes, they hurt people. Poverty and classism, yes, they hurt people. The belief that war is the solution to conflict, yes, that hurts people. In your examples above, are you really with a straight face suggesting to me that when the gay fundamentalist Christian is trying to "pray the gay away" that the underlying problem here is that he's praying??

 

[Autodidact]

The kind of prayer that Lilithu is describing, and which she (right? she?) refers to as a spiritual practice, does work a beneficial change in the person praying. It is basically a similar practice to some forms of meditation. It is a good thing in many ways. In that type of prayer, that goal, and that definition, prayer works. And since all of us touch and influence many other people, in that sense in can even impact the world in general and have a positive impact. This is the idea that peace begins with the individual. All good, and I agree and even support and sometimes use this kind of "prayer."

Most people pray for something to happen in the world directly, as a result of their prayer. This is called intecessory prayer. It clearl does not work.

What bothers me is that if I Google "prayer works" right now, I'll get a ton of sites about the latter. This is what the average person means by "work." When ministers say, "Prayer works," they mean, and are heard as saying, that prayer will get what you are praying for. This is an outright lie. That's why the issue is important to me. Lies bug me.

 

[Scott C.]

IMO prayer does not work in any common meaning of the word "works." Do you think it does? If so, what do you mean when you say that prayer works?

It’s not possible to use the scientific method to demonstrate the efficacy or inefficacy of prayer, be it intercessory prayer or otherwise. Even if the scientific method can be used, to some extent, to demonstrate that people who pray for themselves seem to receive a benefit, that would not evidence that God is the cause of that benefit.

I’m fully convinced that there is a God and that God hears every prayer. I see blessings given, as a result of those prayers, to myself and to those for whom I pray. I see the intersession of God in the lives of others due to the prayers of others in their behalf. It’s not possible to scientifically prove my conclusions to another. Nevertheless, these are my conclusions and are based on personal spiritual experiences, which serve as compelling evidence to me. In other words, God has proven to me, that he lives and answers prayers, intercessory and otherwise.

I believe there are blessings from God which he is willing to grant, but only does so when one asks through sincere prayer. There are other things which God is simply not willing to do, even though one asks in sincere faith. In any case, God always hears sincere prayers and answers them with blessings in one way or another, even if the specific request was not granted in the way that was requested.

I don’t pretend that I can scientifically prove any of this to be true. But, it’s also impossible to use the scientific method to prove me wrong.

A parent is concerned for the welfare of a depressed child who lives away from home. The parent prays for the child’s welfare. A neighbor, who doesn’t know the child is depressed, feels impressed to pay him or her a visit. The neighbor comes by and offers much needed advice to the individual. A friendship is started and this helps to lift the individual from the depression. The neighbor also has a brother in the mental health profession and they hook up for additional help. The parent’s prayer was answered. God heard the prayer and impressed a neighbor to pay the child a visit. A string of events happened from there all to help the child get the needed help.

While I made the above example up, these types of things happen regularly. A non-believer could easily say it was a coincidence, while the believer sees the hand of God and recognizes the blessing.

How is it possible to scientifically demonstrate that these events were or were not the result of prayer?

 

[lilithu]

This is an outright lie. That's why the issue is important to me. Lies bug me.

No, it's not a lie. It may be your assessment that the assertion is incorrect. That doesn't make it a lie.

Again, what I'm hearing is that certain people are bugged because someone else believes differently than they do.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

While I made the above example up, these types of things happen regularly. A non-believer could easily say it was a coincidence, while the believer sees the hand of God and recognizes the blessing.

As a non-believer, I do notice a strong tendency for "the hand of God" to work only in ways that can also occur by coincidence. It seems to me that the vast majority of the time, things that are attributed to God answering prayer are things where there was at least a chance of them happening anyhow.

Your example suggested that God might answer a prayer about a child's depression by instilling a neighbor with the motivation to stop in and say hello. Does God ever answer a prayer like that by teleporting the child home for a visit?

It's been suggested previously in the thread that God will sometimes answer prayers by putting people's cancer into remission... but does he ever regenerate people's amputated limbs?

Ideas suddenly appear in people's heads with or without the intervention of God. So does remission of cancer. But in cases where an outcome would be impossible without the intervention of God, it never happens.

How is it possible to scientifically demonstrate that these events were or were not the result of prayer?

I think that a double-blind study would be the best way, as has been done. You don't need to prove that God exists to determine whether prayer is effective. All you need is the input (prayer) and the output (effect of prayer). What happens between is speculative; all that matters is whether there's a correlation between the two.

 

[crystalonyx]

"Does prayer work?"

Whose prayer, and define what success might be? Tough, because then you have to define what god is, how it answers prayer, and whether it is benevolent, neutral or malevolent. "Prayer" means different things to different people and differing religions.

 

[Scott C.]

As a non-believer, I do notice a strong tendency for "the hand of God" to work only in ways that can also occur by coincidence.

There are cases where God answers prayers in ways that seem to defy science, such as raising the dead or instantly healing the blind. These types of answers are the exception and not the rule.

I think that a double-blind study would be the best way, as has been done. You don't need to prove that God exists to determine whether prayer is effective. All you need is the input (prayer) and the output (effect of prayer). What happens between is speculative; all that matters is whether there's a correlation between the two.

I still say it can't be done. God doesn't respond to prayer petitions being offered as part of a scientific experiment IMO. God reveals himself and demonstrates his hand in our lives on his terms, not ours. The people of Babel wanted to get to heaven on their terms, not Gods. They weren't interested in keeping the commandments to go to heaven or in exercising faith to find God. They disregarded what God asked of them and tried to reach him on their terms - they preferred to build a tower real high until it reached the heavens. It didn't work. God will always remain in the realm of faith and reveal himself only to those who seek him on his terms.

 

[fantome profane]

There are cases where God answers prayers in ways that seem to defy science, such as raising the dead or instantly healing the blind. These types of answers are the exception and not the rule.

Ah, but it would be really impressive if “God” were to do both simultaneously. He could instantly heal a blind zombie. That would be cool.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

It’s not possible to use the scientific method to demonstrate the efficacy or inefficacy of prayer, be it intercessory prayer or otherwise.

No, it IS possible to use science to demonstrate the efficacy of prayer. The studies have been done, and the effect simply does not seem to be there.

What IS impossible is for science to *disprove* that prayer has some effect. (Some complicated, immeasurable either in principle or in practice, effect.)

Nor can science disprove that flipping a coin has an effect. Did you flip the *right* coin? Were enough coins flipped? Were they flipped sincerely enough? Could intercessory coin-flipping have a beneficial effect ten years down the road, or in other ways that can't be easily measured? Etc, etc.

 

[UnTheist]

I have heard before that the reason some people believe the reason that prayer's effectiveness cannot be measured is because that God is unwilling to answer "fake" prayers from people that know they are seeing if prayer works, and as well to people who are genuinely praying for someone, but are unknowingly part of a study.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

If you change yourself for the better then you change the world for the better. ...if you change yourself for the better then you change the world for the better.

Yes, agreed, as I said twice: All of our thoughts and behaviors affect us psychologically and socially. And naturally by extension, since social effects can effect the entire world, all of our thoughts and behaviors can affect the world, from baseball to pornography to prayer.

Again, no one is disputing this.

I carefully explained the notion of "prayer works" that is being disputed in my last post:

Yet there are a disturbingly large number of people in this country who think that prayers *really* work: that prayers functions as communications which go out somewhere and are heard by someone in authority over the universe, and He may be moved, if our prayers are numerous or sincere or worthy enough, to make changes to the natural course of events in our favor--sometimes even against the interests of others (an enemy during wartime, say). It is similar to how lots of sincere, enthusiastic letters to your Mayor might influence the operation of your city, only in this case there is no reality check: if the letters to the Mayor don't bring about tax reform, at some point you realize a new course of action is required, or that it simply isn't gonna happen and you learn to accept the unchangeable. But prayers are always assumed to work, even when they manifestly do not work, so it can be a perpetual source of wasted time and effort, false hope and false assurance.​

This is the issue I am raising. Does prayer "work" in THAT sense (the one explained above)? What do you think?

You see something that you dislike as inherently harmful

No, I see something that is manifestly harmful as harmful. There are plenty of things I dislike but don't see as inherently harmful. Black licorice, for exmaple. But let's focus on the issue at hand, rather than my personal motivations/inclinations.

Progressives like me try to maximize freedom and diversity while balancing that out with justice. We accept that even if people believe differently from us, that is a good thing. Thus we do not attack things that are simply different, but only if they are truly hurting people.

I'm with you entirely. I simply think that the traditional notion that prayer works (which is very different from your notion of it working as spiritual practice) is truly hurting people.

It not only hurts themselves and others, but it makes them vulnerable to being taken advantage of, as you can see in this video (you can fast-forward to 1:00 minutes): YouTube - James Randi Debunks Peter Popoff Faith Healer
And this one: YouTube - Peter Popoff Miracle Spring Water

I can't imagine how all those poor, sick, dying, crippled people feel when their highest hopes and assurances are dashed when they go home and realize the money or the cure isn't coming. No doubt they will wonder if it was their own lack of faith or prayer that prevented the cure. James Randi followed up on the boy with crutches, who asked with tears streaming down his face why he hadn't been healed after all.

It literally sickens me. I see nothing wrong and everything right with attempting to warn our peers that prayer does not work just as we might warn them that expensive drugs or therapies don't work. People should be warned that it doesn't work *before* they are put in vulnerable positions of poverty, illness, etc. (And again, as if it bears repeating, I'm not talking about prayer "working" in your sense but in a different sense.)

Homophobia and heterosexism, yes, they hurt people. Poverty and classism, yes, they hurt people. The belief that war is the solution to conflict, yes, that hurts people. In your examples above, are you really with a straight face suggesting to me that when the gay fundamentalist Christian is trying to "pray the gay away" that the underlying problem here is that he's praying??

The problem is not that he's praying, but it is a serious problem that he thinks prayer will prevent him from e.g. having wet dreams about other men or feeling aroused when he sees an attractive man. Prayer can't, and won't accomplish this. Someone needs to tell him. The problem is only exacerbated because, as I said,

[The belief] is sheltered from criticism and reinforced by many educated religious liberals in our country, who give sermons and write Op-eds claiming prayer works without pointing out what they know perfectly well to be true: that their definition of "works" isn't being disputed by anyone, and is fundamentally different and watered-down from the widespread, harmful notion that prayer *really* works.​

 

[JTFC]

When I say prayer works I mean it in a sense that God does reply to and answer prayers. The only thing is that, the answer isn't always going to be "yes."

Most people doubt that God will answer their prayers because most times it does not work out the way that they want it to.

For example, say a person's father is in critical condition in the hospital and that person prays for their father to overcome his injuries or sickness and live. God may say "yes" or "no" according to His plan for that person's father. The father may have to leave this physical world to be with God because it is God's will. Or the father could live and be with his son until it was actually his time to go.

God is not being mean to us when he doesn't say "yes" to our prayers. He simply wants to protect us from what may harm us or others. Most of the time we don't always know what we truly want, which can lead to blind prayers.

Hope this answered your question.
Sincerely,

JTFC

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There are cases where God answers prayers in ways that seem to defy science, such as raising the dead or instantly healing the blind. These types of answers are the exception and not the rule.

... and they tend to occur in ancient or nth-hand stories. I don't recall hearing any story of spontanous healings of the blind on the news in my lifetime, and it seems that as medical science gets better and better at confirming death, God "raises the dead" less and less... and I've never heard of anyone who's been embalmed coming back to life.

I have heard before that the reason some people believe the reason that prayer's effectiveness cannot be measured is because that God is unwilling to answer "fake" prayers from people that know they are seeing if prayer works, and as well to people who are genuinely praying for someone, but are unknowingly part of a study.

At a certain point, doesn't that become like arguing that there actually is an elephant in the basement and you just can't see him because he's very shy and really good at hiding?

 

[cardero]

JFTC writes: For example, say a person's father is in critical condition in the hospital and that person prays for their father to overcome his injuries or sickness and live. God may say "yes" or "no" according to His plan for that person's father.

Why can't the father have purposed this critical condition into his own physical life? What “mysterious” excuse could you make for God for willing or purposing a plan for any human BEing to find themselves in a critical medical condition? Have you ever seen a robot or a puppet praying?

 

[Scott C.]

Why can't the father have purposed this critical condition into his own physical life? What “mysterious” excuse could you make for God for willing or purposing a plan for any human BEing to find themselves in a critical medical condition? Have you ever seen a robot or a puppet praying?

Are you suggesting that you don't understand the Christian concept that adversity builds character and is by divine design part of the mortal experience?

 

[cardero]

Are you suggesting that you don't understand the Christian concept that adversity builds character and is by divine design part of the mortal experience?

What I am doing is reintroducing the Patrickism concept that it is not GOD’s will or divine design that must be done but our own purpose and design. Since it is our mortal experience it is our choices, our fortunes or misfortunes, that eventually build character.

It is not GOD’s will to call us back but our own decision when we decide to go back. The person who is praying to a god for the recovery of someone else’s health on the outside may appear to be caring or selfish but one thing for sure is that this person is not considering what the unhealthy person has eventually decided for their own existence and demise.

 

[blackout]

What I am doing is reintroducing the Patrickism concept that it is not GOD’s will or divine design that must be done but our own purpose and design. Since it is our mortal experience it is our choices, our fortunes or misfortunes, that eventually build character.

It is not GOD’s will to call us back but our own decision when we decide to go back. The person who is praying to a god for the recovery of someone else’s health on the outside may appear to be caring or selfish but one thing for sure is that this person is not considering what the unhealthy person has eventually decided for their own existence and demise.

I agree. And this is why I don't "pray" for others.
I rarely engage in magick on the behalf of others either,
unless they are directly involved in the magick...
or are so united with me that it is within my parameters
to REAListically act on their behalf.

I can throw out the lifeline of my own Will
to another person as well...
but it is entirely their own decision to grab on or not.