Prayer in science

[Quintessence]

Well yes and no. It works as a psychological tool no different than an illusion or mind trick.

Pardon: phrasing it this way - because of the "bah humbug" subtexts these terms have in our culture - creates exactly the kind of trivialization I object to. The ability to do this is sacred and magical to me.

If you believe in something hard enough it will in fact come back on you in a pysical sense. However this doesn't hold true to ANY divine intervention or mystical power. So it works but not in any way a believer would assume it to.

You might want to be a little more careful when making statements about what "believers" would assume. I, personally, have made no such assumptions, though I'll grant there's a chance I don't fit into your mold of what a "believer" is. :slap:

 

[Koldo]

Pardon: phrasing it this way - because of the "bah humbug" subtexts these terms have in our culture - creates exactly the kind of trivialization I object to. The ability to do this is sacred and magical to me.

Out of curiosity, why do you object to this trivialization?
Is it merely because it disagrees with your view, or is there something more to it?

 

[Quintessence]

Out of curiosity, why do you object to this trivialization?
Is it merely because it disagrees with your view, or is there something more to it?

Hah! It actually has little to nothing to do with the view disagreeing (or agreeing) with my own, it has to do with respect of persons. When someone expresses a love or an interest in something and another person's response is to trivialize it or be dismissive of it, that's a put-down. Whether intentional or not, it's a slap in the face and it can cause communications and learning breakdowns. That's bad enough in of itself, but where such put-downs are deliberately mean-spirited, I have a serious problem with them. I don't see this particular case as mean-spirited in the least, but the trivialization still serves as an unintentional put-down for some.

 

[Koldo]

Hah! It actually has little to nothing to do with the view disagreeing (or agreeing) with my own, it has to do with respect of persons. When someone expresses a love or an interest in something and another person's response is to trivialize it or be dismissive of it, that's a put-down. Whether intentional or not, it's a slap in the face and it can cause communications and learning breakdowns. That's bad enough in of itself, but where such put-downs are deliberately mean-spirited, I have a serious problem with them. I don't see this particular case as mean-spirited in the least, but the trivialization still serves as an unintentional put-down for some.

If anything, I am very much in favour of trivializing every belief and thought until people learn to detach themselves from them. Until they can finally free themselves from their own chains.

 

[Quintessence]

If anything, I am very much in favour of trivializing every belief and thought until people learn to detach themselves from them. Until they can finally free themselves from their own chains.

I'm sure you don't intend for what you say to come across this way, but in my mind, this translates to "don't feel emotions towards anything ever and be a total psychopath." >_>; I don't regard having preferences, beliefs, or thoughts as being "chained." All human beings have such passions, and on top of that, all human beings have intrinsic limitations regardless of how "free" they think they are by "detaching" from reality.

I don't disagree that excessive attachment or extremes of attachment can be problematic, though.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Pardon: phrasing it this way - because of the "bah humbug" subtexts these terms have in our culture - creates exactly the kind of trivialization I object to. The ability to do this is sacred and magical to me.

Then thats your perogitave but it doesn't mean you can count it as evidence of the suppernatural.

You might want to be a little more careful when making statements about what "believers" would assume. I, personally, have made no such assumptions, though I'll grant there's a chance I don't fit into your mold of what a "believer" is. :slap:

There are a near infinite number of opinions and I have to generalize sometimes. Sorry if you land outside of it. Won't be the last I gurantee you.

 

[Quintessence]

Then thats your perogitave but it doesn't mean you can count it as evidence of the suppernatural.

Technically, I can count it as whatever I want.

However, seeing as how I don't accept the concept of "supernatural" to begin with, this is a non-issue.

There are a near infinite number of opinions and I have to generalize sometimes. Sorry if you land outside of it. Won't be the last I gurantee you.

Oh, I understand. 'Tis not a problem. Given the dominant god-concept in my culture is classical monotheism, I'm pretty used to falling well outside of my culture's standard assumptions about "believers." :beach:

 

[Koldo]

I'm sure you don't intend for what you say to come across this way, but in my mind, this translates to "don't feel emotions towards anything ever and be a total psychopath." >_>;

No, that was not my intent.

I don't regard having preferences, beliefs, or thoughts as being "chained." All human beings have such passions, and on top of that, all human beings have intrinsic limitations regardless of how "free" they think they are by "detaching" from reality.

I don't disagree that excessive attachment or extremes of attachment can be problematic, though.

Having preferences, beliefs or thoughts do not chain human beings.
Becoming so attached to them that you feel disrespected when they are trivialized does.

 

[Dickyh995]

Tell that to me, my bro and my mother who won a vehicle. At the time we needed it, because we had 5 or more people living in our house.

Isn't it incredible that your deity must have heard your mutterings and gave you a vehicle to tow your toys around and chose to completely ignore the prayers of all the starving children in the world. Nice guy.