Religion's contribution is spiritual, thus not observable/demonstrable. Apples and oranges. They are two completely different aspects of the human experience.
Some spiritual observations
- Thread starter eanassir
- Start date
Religion's contribution is spiritual, thus not observable/demonstrable. Apples and oranges. They are two completely different aspects of the human experience.
It could...but it's not. How do we know? We know because the way science is done is transparent. That is why science evolves: it is self-correcting. During the time that people tried to cure diseases like polio, rubella and smallpox with prayer, funny dances and sheep entrails, the patients died and the diseases spread. In places where vaccines against these viruses are used, the diseases are all but gone.
Science assumes that its results are all coincidence. It's called the "null hypothesis". When scientific theory produces a testable hypothesis, its effects are compared to what we would expect coincidence (or prayer) to produce. If the effects are too large and consistent to ignore, we reject the null hypothesis and conclude --provisionally-- that the theory had merit.
Science is aware that all people --scientists with a pet theory, particularly-- see what they want to see. Humans are unbelievably unreliable witnesses. Google "confirmation bias", "mental set" and "inattentional blindness" for a couple of examples. As a result, all data is subject to statistical validition, tests of repeatability and peer-review.
Religious experience is not.
Last edited:
Science has proven for itself actually, that recovery from illness can be brought about by faith. They call it the placebo effect. It applies equally well to faith in science, faith in homeopathy, faith in reiki practitioners, accupuncturists, and even faith in prayer/deities. That the human brain is wired for faith in such a manner speaks volumes about the place of faith in healthy human development and care. What people choose to attribute that faith to, what they choose to base that faith in, varies as much as the rest of the human condition.
karrie is right about the placebo effect, and the nocebo effect, check it out: YouTube - Ben Goldacre at Nerdstock.
For those of you who are offended by profanity, there's a bit at the beginning.
Something else to keep in mind: For every sick person who recovers after a prayer, hundreds die after a prayer, and almost all of the ones who get better, were prayed for while they were in hospital. Divine intervention's OK, but divine intervention along with competent medical care: then you've got something!
For those of you who are offended by profanity, there's a bit at the beginning.
Something else to keep in mind: For every sick person who recovers after a prayer, hundreds die after a prayer, and almost all of the ones who get better, were prayed for while they were in hospital. Divine intervention's OK, but divine intervention along with competent medical care: then you've got something!
Is this the extent of your explanation? Someone asked God to intervene and the person got better so God must have intervened?
Science has proven the efficacy of the placebo effect? So we can add this to the list of scientific explanations then? Religion is still at zero.
I tend to joke a bit and say that Atheists are just people who got a Rosary for penance in confession when they were expecting three Hail Mary's, but I think that a lot of them (not all) are using science or the excuse that a relative or someone they know got abused by a religious figure, to demean all religions, when in fact, if they search within, they would find that it's probably due to their own fallibility.
Those who use pure science, only doubt the existence of a creator... They are not certain that He / She / It does not exist!
Those who use pure science, only doubt the existence of a creator... They are not certain that He / She / It does not exist!
I think that we could look at the power of the mind over matter. Belief in a cure, as any doctor will tell you, ups the chance of a cure, the rate of which has a correlation to the intensity of belief or faith. Faith in something is not restricted to faith in the religious or spiritual sense. It can be just a faith in the doctor, the drug, in the benevolence of life/universe or in their own ability to overcome the disease. Faith is a powerful healer and does not necessarily require divine intervention (as most people understand it).
Last edited:
Actually DaSleeper, I was a happy Christian. I liked my churches, my ministers and my co-religionists. I still celebrate Easter and Christmas and read the relevant Bible passages to my children. I love the hymns and sometimes go to a church service on the two Big Holidays. I occasionally re-read my favourite Bible bits, as I have a fondness for the Noah story, Matthew's Gospel and Ecclesiastes.
But
I am certain that the personal god of the Judeo-Christian religions does not exist. Just as certain that leprechauns, werewolves and dragons do no exist. More certain than I am that extraterrestrial intelligent beings do not exist. I can't KNOW that these things don't exist, obviously, but I am about as sure that there is no personal god as I am about pretty much anything .
So I can't speak for anyone else, but I am certain that those stories and hymns that I like so much are no more real than Harry Potter or Odysseus.
But
I am certain that the personal god of the Judeo-Christian religions does not exist. Just as certain that leprechauns, werewolves and dragons do no exist. More certain than I am that extraterrestrial intelligent beings do not exist. I can't KNOW that these things don't exist, obviously, but I am about as sure that there is no personal god as I am about pretty much anything .
So I can't speak for anyone else, but I am certain that those stories and hymns that I like so much are no more real than Harry Potter or Odysseus.
Very few atheists would put it that way. Usually, as per the null hypothesis pastafarian described above, it's some version of "The evidence is insufficient to justify accepting the claim as true." For a claim to be true in the scientific sense means only that the evidence is sufficiently compelling that it's unreasonable not to accept it, but the acceptance is always provisional to some degree, because any true claim must in principle be falsifiable. That is, it must be possible to at least imagine evidence that could prove it to be wrong. If no conceivable evidence could ever disprove it, the evidence in its favour doesn't matter either, it's invulnerable to any kind of evidence and thus has no propositional content at all. If you want certainty, and a lot of people do, science isn't where you'll find it.
Like faith curing an illness, faith in fairies, gnomes, dragons, animal spirits, sprites and genies may cause them to appear to some and is dependent on the belief of the believer. They cannot and do not appear to the nonbeliever so they will remain spiritually impoverished until they open their minds to the possibility.
All these above posts indicate and confirm what I said: that they avoid seeing the truth and discuss every case separately.
While the observations that I said were seen by myself and by trusted men, and actually were and are seen by a large number of people.
And I ask everyone of you: if he truthfully ever saw any similar thing!
Man after Death
While the observations that I said were seen by myself and by trusted men, and actually were and are seen by a large number of people.
And I ask everyone of you: if he truthfully ever saw any similar thing!
Man after Death
No Eanassir, I have never seen a genie. Or anything like one. However, I am certain that they are no less likely than God :smile:.
One interesting study on the effects of prayer on health outcomes after heart surgery is discussed here: What the latest prayer study tells us about God. - By William Saletan - Slate Magazine.
And I say that I have seen may different manifestations of spiritual beings but the form they take is dependent on the belief system of the observer. The form of the beings that you saw is completely dependent on your belief system, but since I do not subscribe to the same belief system as you, the forms I saw were did not take on the same form as yours did. It does not mean that one system of belief is any better than another, just that they are different. Not having any dogmatic belief system at all has allowed me to see spiritual beings in forms that are in keeping with many different beliefs.
One thing that study did not account for is the faith of people who believe in the divinity of humans, in their own divinity. The cure could be attributed to divine intervention when the intervention was their own faith in themselves. There is a growing number of people who hold this belief but it seems to be ignored by the majority of people who think that the divine is an outside influence.
So is God's religion a placebo?
Therefore, you deny and disbelieve; because you said it is a placebo; and how will the placebo work when you know it is merely a placebo?
The doubting about the next life is the disbelief, while the certainty about the next spirit world is the sure belief.
As it is in the Quran 27: 66:
بَلِ ادَّارَكَ عِلْمُهُمْ فِي الْآخِرَةِ بَلْ هُمْ فِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهَا بَلْ هُم مِّنْهَا عَمِونَ
The explanation:
(But [actually] their knowledge attains [to their fathers' knowledge] of the afterlife: being only denial;
moreover they are in doubt concerning it;
even they are blind as to it.)
And in this aya 34: 21
وَمَا كَانَ لَهُ عَلَيْهِم مِّن سُلْطَانٍ إِلَّا لِنَعْلَمَ مَن يُؤْمِنُ بِالْآخِرَةِ مِمَّنْ هُوَ مِنْهَا فِي شَكٍّ وَرَبُّكَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ حَفِيظٌ
The explanation:
(Yet he [Satan] had no authority over them, but only that We would know [and distinguish] the one believing in the afterlife from the one doubting thereof; surely your Lord [O Mohammed] does observe all things.)
It also doesn't consider the midi-chlorian levels of those praying. If you have a low midi-chlorian count you can't manipulate the Force as well as those with a higher count. An increasing number of people identify with this belief.
Jedi census phenomenon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
