Double-blind Prayer Efficacy Test -- Really?

[Subduction Zone]

Sure, I am all for transexuals. You know that 'glass ceiling' feminists talk about? Well why not take your all white male executive team and at 9am each day declare half are women and half are black. And revert back to white male at 5pm? Love it. And seeing men dominate women's sports is good too. Watched a guy last week claim he was a 'woman' and bash a female champion MMA fighter bloodied and nearly senseless. More power to him, I mean, her.

Love how Jesus put it, 'Every generation is right in its own eyes.'

Okay, if you want to go the way of transphobia that is fine with me. One can always find problems for an idea if one misportrays it. Have you ever talked to any of our trans members here? Have you asked them why they were trans? They might get a bit sensitive about it since they are attacked so often but have you asked them about the physical evidence that supports them?

\And can you argue without using strawman arguments?

 

[sojourner]

If people claim that prayer makes them feel nice, we should just shrug and say "whatever", but when people claim that prayer can bring about physical changes, we should conduct trials to test that claim.

Yes we should. I’ve seen a couple cases that I would call “miraculous healing.” But just one or two. That being said, I wouldn’t use those two cases to say “all prayer is efficacious in all cases.” Further, I would point to studies that show meditation lowers stress and increases well being, because that deserves more than a dismissive “whatever.” Additionally, I would agree that those who make the blanket claim “prayer heals” pointing to physical illness are envisioning prayer in an unhelpful way.

 

[sojourner]

In that case, you go to a counselor or therapist.

Not always. Most counselors don’t engage with the spiritual aspect of the human experience.

 

[sojourner]

You should meet up with @TransmutingSoul for a platitude-off.

Sorry; I don’t see what’s so funny. You skeptics generally point the finger at we religious snd tell us how disrespect we are. Yet here you go.

 

[sojourner]

Subsequent behavior.

Well…?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yes we should. I’ve seen a couple cases that I would call “miraculous healing.” But just one or two. That being said, I wouldn’t use those two cases to say “all prayer is efficacious in all cases.” Further, I would point to studies that show meditation lowers stress and increases well being, because that deserves more than a dismissive “whatever.” Additionally, I would agree that those who make the blanket claim “prayer heals” pointing to physical illness are envisioning prayer in an unhelpful way.

Isn't it odd that when closely observed "miraculous healing" never appears to occur. Usually the "miraculous healing" is due to the efforts of medical professionals using standard techniques that would otherwise be ignored. Or the person never was ill to begin with.

 

[sojourner]

No, belief *before* achieving a goal is not self-actualization.

Planning to achieve the goal is self-actualization.

Plans are not beliefs.

I’m not talking about “plans” or “goals.” I’m talking about coming to a realization of who one really is, and then acting the part.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not always. Most counselors don’t engage with the spiritual aspect of the human experience.

And what exactly do you mean by "spiritual"? That was an attack that you tried to use on me earlier when your personal healing claims of Reiki were shown to be without merit.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I’m not talking about “plans” or “goals.” I’m talking about coming to a realization of who one really is, and then acting the part.

What on Earth does that even mean?

 

[sojourner]

So, I can believe you had a feeling of tingling on your head as you felt great joy. That this was God touching you is a different thing

No it’s not. “God” is subjective. This right here is the very crux of the matter. And it comes down to belief and inner perspective, not outward, objective evidence.

 

[Sheldon]

As belief in a vengeful deity has decreased, overall toxicity has also decreased. I would suggest the book 'The Better Angels of our Nature' by Pinker. it goes over a number of ways that violence and general nastiness has decreased over the last few centuries.

It's worth noting that this is despite two catastrophic world wars occurring in that time as well, and the exponentially destructive nature of mechanised warfare. Yet violence has overall still decreased, as Pinker demonstrates in his book.

 

[sojourner]

Yup. You failed completely

to offer any evidence that your view was superior to all those modern translators I showed you

and you haven't offered anything that displaces my accurate observation that 'sick' is a perfectly valid translation of the Greek,

and you don't have any clear example of the Greek meaning 'depressed', the meaning you argue for.

Things are not so just because you want them to be so.

Nor are they not-so, just because you kids don’t want to do your homework. I’ve spent the last twenty years exegeting Biblical texts; it’s my profession. I’m not going to waste my time going through all that just for a meaningless Internet forum. I’ve nothing to prove to you. Do your own homework on the subject. But I CAN say authoritatively two things: 1) taking a cursory look at translations does no good. 2) Seeing that’s the route you’ve chosen, your “conclusion” means diddly.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's worth noting that this is despite two catastrophic world wars occurring in that time as well, and the exponentially destructive nature of mechanised warfare. Yet violence has overall still decreased, as Pinker demonstrates in his book.

Shhh! Ixnay on the things are getting etterbay! Believers in the good old days don't want facts and figures.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nor are they not-so, just because you kids don’t want to do your homework. I’ve spent the last twenty years exegeting Biblical texts; it’s my profession. I’m not going to waste my time going through all that just for a meaningless Internet forum. I’ve nothing to prove to you. Do your own homework on the subject. But I CAN say authoritatively two things: 1) taking a cursory look at translations does no good. 2) Seeing that’s the route you’ve chosen, your “conclusion” means diddly.

Ah, the inevitable "Do your own homework" when one demands that a person supports his own claims If your claim about exegeting the Bible for years is true then it should be child's play for you to refute his claims. "Because I said so" has no authority in an argument nor are supposed degrees that one claims, but will not demonstrate.

When it comes to physics claims I trust @Polymath257 because he can support his claims. When it comes to other sciences and the people that have expertise in them I also trust their claims because they have shown that they can do chemistry, or biology, or whatever skill that they claim to have a degree in. Getting angry when one's supposed expertise is challenged is nothing to ever get mad at on the internet. Anyone can claim to have a degree. Demonstrating that one earned it is another matter.

 

[Sheldon]

Odds are that the tests were designed with the cooperation of those that believe in woo woo. True believers often are so sure of their beliefs that they will subject them to proper testing. It is only when the testing shows that their beliefs are false that they turn on the testing procedure.

The worst real world example that I can think of is the Shroud of Turin. A group of scientists all agreed on protocols, where to sample from etc.. But when the results told us that it was a fake at least one scientist went back on his word. He supposedly found some threads from his testing that dated differently. The problem was that one of the protocols that they all agreed to was that of no private sampling.


That means we know that he lied. The only question is when.

Indeed, as far as the shroud is concerned what is very telling, is that the RCC have refused any further testing since to establish the date of its origin beyond this subjective conjecture offered post ad hoc.

Porfessor Dawkins had a series on TV, and they designed a test to test the claims of water diviners, it was double blind and the results duly examined, with all of the people claiming the ability very confident it would validate their belief. They all produced results either directly in line with blind chance, or even below this for some. an unequivocal fail, yet in every single case they refused to accept the results, and blamed the test had somehow skewed the results.

One can only imagine the contrasting reaction if the results had gone their way. You have to laugh really. If faith is to be admired for anything, it is it's impressive efficacy in helping people cling to a belief in the face of all contrary objective evidence.

As far as the participants in that research, yes it's hard to imagine they participated if they did not believe their prayers would work, and the bible certainly makes some fairly heuristic claims about what prayer is able to achieve.

Mark 11:24 ESV
Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.

John 14:13-14 ESV
Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.

Hmm

 

[Sheldon]

Polymath257 said: ↑
As belief in a vengeful deity has decreased, overall toxicity has also decreased. I would suggest the book 'The Better Angels of our Nature' by Pinker. it goes over a number of ways that violence and general nastiness has decreased over the last few centuries.

Certainly not my reading of our society.

Pinker fact checks things before writing his book, your posts here suggest you do not. His claims about reduced rates of violence are well supported, and this is despite two catastrophic world wars being taken into account.

 

[blü 2]

I’ve spent the last twenty years exegeting Biblical texts

Gosh!

it’s my profession.

Gosh!

I’m not going to waste my time going through all that just for a meaningless Internet forum.

Smart time to withdraw, I agree.

 

[Sheldon]

Who do you think designed the tests that were run on prayers? Skeptics were probably involved, but only to the point of keeping them from doing meaningless tests.

Well they published the results for peer review, so if there were substantive flaws they would have been exposed. The only objections I have heard or read are the "god is mysterious" "and can't be tested" copout, as you pointed out earlier, it is not hard to imagine the starkly contrasting reaction from theists had the results gone their way.

 

[PruePhillip]

Okay, if you want to go the way of transphobia that is fine with me. One can always find problems for an idea if one misportrays it. Have you ever talked to any of our trans members here? Have you asked them why they were trans? They might get a bit sensitive about it since they are attacked so often but have you asked them about the physical evidence that supports them?

\And can you argue without using strawman arguments?

I see people on video declaring you can be anything you want to be. In Mike Walsh's What Is A Woman documentary there are prominent trans people celebrating when this bearded father of four asks can he be a woman too. Just love it. And all those kids on 'puberty blockers' ? They will be the next generation's tragedy - and people will hate 'government' for allowing it. And removing the breasts of pubescent girls. Remember that guy in England jailed for rape, and declared he was a woman? Well they put him in a women's jail where he raped a few more women. And that issue about Muslims raping 1200 kids in Rotherham, but they allowed it because it was their custom?

We had this in Australia 20 years back. A girl shot to fame in Victoria by 'demanding' she participate in men's bowls. There was men's bowls, women's bowls and mixed bowls. She was a feminist hero - and not a single person asked the obvious questions, like can men participate in women's bowls? Why can't she just participate in mixed bowls? Emperors new clothes stuff - and it's a lot madder now in 2022 with the whole question of men and women tossed out the window.

 

[PruePhillip]

Gosh!
Gosh!
Smart time to withdraw, I agree.

Please don't be arrogant.