Has prayer ever worked for you?

[Dr. Zaus]

I already stated positive thinking is good. I disagree that wishful thinking is the same thing, especially when fantastical.

Except the science disagrees:
Covington, S., Griffin, D., & Dauer, R. (2011). Helping Men Recover: A Program for Treating Addiction: Special Edition for Use in the Criminal Justice System. Jossey-Bass.

Kissman, K., & Maurer, L. (2002). East meets West: Therapeutic aspects of spirituality in health, mental health and addiction recovery. International Social Work, 45, 35-43.

Kus, R. J. (1995). Prayer and meditation in addiction recovery. Journal of Chemical Dependency Treatment, 5(2), 101-115.

Priester, P. E., Scherer, J., Steinfeldt, J. A., Jana-Masri, A., Jashinsky, T., Jones, J. E., & Vang, C. (2009). The frequency of prayer, meditation and holistic interventions in addictions treatment: A national survey. Pastoral Psychology, 58(3), 315-322.

Miller, W. R., Forcehimes, A., O'Leary, M. J., & LaNoue, M. D. (2008). Spiritual direction in addiction treatment: Two clinical trials. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 35(4), 434-442.

Miller, W. R., & Bogenschutz, M. P. (2007). Spirituality and addiction. Southern Medical Journal, 100(4), 433-436.

... I could go on.

 

[Moonbeam]

Except the science disagrees:
Covington, S., Griffin, D., & Dauer, R. (2011). Helping Men Recover: A Program for Treating Addiction: Special Edition for Use in the Criminal Justice System. Jossey-Bass.

Kissman, K., & Maurer, L. (2002). East meets West: Therapeutic aspects of spirituality in health, mental health and addiction recovery. International Social Work, 45, 35-43.

Kus, R. J. (1995). Prayer and meditation in addiction recovery. Journal of Chemical Dependency Treatment, 5(2), 101-115.

Priester, P. E., Scherer, J., Steinfeldt, J. A., Jana-Masri, A., Jashinsky, T., Jones, J. E., & Vang, C. (2009). The frequency of prayer, meditation and holistic interventions in addictions treatment: A national survey. Pastoral Psychology, 58(3), 315-322.

Miller, W. R., Forcehimes, A., O'Leary, M. J., & LaNoue, M. D. (2008). Spiritual direction in addiction treatment: Two clinical trials. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 35(4), 434-442.

Miller, W. R., & Bogenschutz, M. P. (2007). Spirituality and addiction. Southern Medical Journal, 100(4), 433-436.

... I could go on.

Love you, DixyCrat

Your post made me recall a story, The Caravan of Dreams. Yours must have been a rather large one because you distribute such wealth here.

 

[WilliamM2]

... I could go on.

So magical thinking helps addicts with addiction. This is really no surprise, as drug addicts and alcoholics are generally in a weak state if mind in the first place.

 

[Moonbeam]

So magical thinking helps addicts with addiction. This is really no surprise, as drug addicts and alcoholics are generally in a weak state if mind in the first place.

You reminds me of the story of two men arguing in front of a Mosque as to whether God would answer the prayers of somebody who failed to remove his shoes, and while they argued a man with no shoes entered, prayed, and left with his prayers answered. You have no idea you engage in magical thinking yourself because you have no need. Perhaps some day that will change. Rule out nothing if it should happen to you. You just never know.

 

[justoh]

Giving what is essentially a drug to drug addicts doesn't seem like a great idea at all. Nicotine can lead to weight loss but it's probably not the best way? I read a study on cannabis and cognitive impairment the other day which says that nicotine in conjunction with marijuana can protect us from some of its deleterious effects, "protecting against some of its cognitive impact in correcting performance and neural activity." Would still rather advocate for the cessation of both drugs.

But fine, it "helps," in the way I already said it would in my original post the other day.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

So magical thinking helps addicts with addiction. This is really no surprise, as drug addicts and alcoholics are generally in a weak state if mind in the first place.

It turns out that the majority of nobel laureates in chemistry and physics, even in the past 10 years, have believed in God: But I suppose they have weak minds too...

The strongest mind is the one weak enough to recognize that it is forever bound to look into the disgusting pit of 'not'. When this is realized the mind can give up its perpetual falling into nullity and accept an updraft of care, with which comes acceptance of the lived-experiences of even those that mean to insult you.

It is for this reason Jesus said "For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."

justoh: it is the deleterious effects of 'drugs' that we object to, this is why very few are against coffee: while an addictive stimulant it is relatively safe and does not counteract ones ability to be a productive member of society.

 

[PowerEngineer]

Wishful thinking is not very helpful in life, and that's all i meant. You can be optimistic or hopeful, but merely wishing for something, especially when you expect these wishes to be granted, by some totalitarian authority is, whose existence is unknowable or unknown is probably foolish and counterproductive.

I agree with you, justoh.

I appreciate the power of positive (and negative) thinking and of the placebo effect, and therefore do acknowledge that a belief can have beneficial (or harmful) effects in some cases even if that belief is demonstrably wrong. You can't seriously argue, however, that mistaken beliefs lead to good results in anything but a very small percentage of such cases. Attitude is certainly NOT everything.

As an agnostic, I also acknowledge the possible existence of something supernatural even though I haven't yet seen sufficient reason to believe it exists. Perhaps faith leaves no room for uncertainty. Still, it'd be refreshing if believers could similarly acknowledge that skeptics can reasonably not believe (rather than attributing nonbelief to self-hate, etc.).

 

[Moonbeam]

PowerEngineer: I agree with you, justoh.

I appreciate the power of positive (and negative) thinking and of the placebo effect, and therefore do acknowledge that a belief can have beneficial (or harmful) effects in some cases even if that belief is demonstrably wrong. You can't seriously argue, however, that mistaken beliefs lead to good results in anything but a very small percentage of such cases.

M: How do you know? How many cases of this are there and how many have been studied. How is the truth of the mistaken nature of the situation determined? How do we determine whether a belief is beneficial or harmful? Do we trust the person who has the belief, consensus of some number of people, a panel of experts or maybe you?

PE: Attitude is certainly NOT everything.

M: How do you know? I am sure attitude isn't a chrome bumper or a flower bed, but that's not what is really meant by saying that attitude is everything. Attitude is everything but if it is wouldn't you have to have the attitude is everything attitude to know it? And you don't.

PE: As an agnostic, I also acknowledge the possible existence of something supernatural even though I haven't yet seen sufficient reason to believe it exists.

M: But so far all we were talking about was positive and negative attitude and the placebo effect. How did we get off into the supernatural?

PE: Perhaps faith leaves no room for uncertainty.

M: I'm not so sure, myself. It seems to me that experience is what leaves no room for uncertainty, like you know love is real by feeling it. You can't just have faith that love is real and know what love is and that it is real, no?

PE: Still, it'd be refreshing if believers could similarly acknowledge that skeptics can reasonably not believe (rather than attributing nonbelief to self-hate, etc.).

M: Why? Why would you state that skepticism is reasonable and then want believers to agree that it is when you seem to think that belief is unreasonable? Do you suffer some form of doubt you want me to assuage?

I am not a believer in the usual sense of the word. But that doesn't change my opinion here regarding the value of prayer. What is instead we say that self hate is the sickness of believers and non believers alike and that self hate is a delusion, a lie and a false belief, a belief that exists not as a philosophical opinion but as a deeply buried feeling, a feeling that is a lie but that is true only because we believe it. Here we have a case where the real belief of believers and non believers alike is the same, but those who pray find a power that steps then across negativity to another place by the feeling of being loved by God. This supernatural, naïve, silly faith they have from their fantasy God in the sky just so happens to correspond for some mysterious reason with the deepest truth in the universe, that we created God in our image, the but the image we have of our self that is worthless and hateful, but the one that is real, that within the human heart is a door to all the love in the universe. Fortunate is he who finds a way to know the truth of such a ridiculous idea. So shut that stupid brain of yours up and look for the attitude that opens up your heart. There is only love, believe it or not.

 

[WilliamM2]

It turns out that the majority of nobel laureates in chemistry and physics, even in the past 10 years, have believed in God: But I suppose they have weak minds too...

I don't know. Have they come up with any more proof than you have?

 

[Pray To Jesus]

Plan is identical to reality for an omnipotent being. It is incoherent to suggest the will or intention of an omnipotent being does not obtain.

Assertions are not arguments.

They are not the same thing logically. Look up the words in a dictionary.

Reality as we know it moves forward with time. Reality as it progresses conforms to God's plan.

 

[Retro Rob]

It turns out that the majority of nobel laureates in chemistry and physics, even in the past 10 years, have believed in God: But I suppose they have weak minds too...

I guess for them, it isn't possible for people to humbly admit that there is something greater than themselves in existence without them having mental issues.

Even agnostic and atheist scientists, when contemplating the vastness of the Cosmos, are left in sheer 'awe' and even recognize how insignificant humans really are in comparison. Are they "mentally weak"? No...but by their own definition in this thread, they are.

At the end of the day, all this conjecture about why people believe really doesn't matter -- why can't we learn to simply accept our differences (in threads like this) and learn to get along in spite of them?

If there is some much research linking causations (not mere correlations) with believe in God with some form of mental illness, please, present it for all to see...peer-reviewed, studied and verified.

Other than that, some of you are simply coming off a bigoted, and hate-filled.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

I don't know. Have they come up with any more proof than you have?

So how does calling recent Nobel laureates in physics and chemistry weak minded help you be a better person? What are you afraid might happen without this insulting stance against everyone that believes differently than you?

, it'd be refreshing if believers could similarly acknowledge that skeptics can reasonably not believe

My statement explained some words by Jesus, but was essentially a philosophical argument open to anyone interested existential reflection. Jew, Gentile, Greek, Free, or Slave.

Moon beam is correct in saying that the pride of self-pity and its ancillary self-hate is pronounced throughout society.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

Giving what is essentially a drug to drug addicts doesn't seem like a great idea at all. Nicotine can lead to weight loss but it's probably not the best way? I read a study on cannabis and cognitive impairment the other day which says that nicotine in conjunction with marijuana can protect us from some of its deleterious effects, "protecting against some of its cognitive impact in correcting performance and neural activity." Would still rather advocate for the cessation of both drugs.

But fine, it "helps," in the way I already said it would in my original post the other day.

Dependence is not same as Abuse. Seems you are under the delusion that drugs are automatically bad. drugs < > illegal drugs.

Methadone, Chantix, nicotine patches, etc. shows that often it's a great idea to give similar drugs to "addicts".

 

[WilliamM2]

So how does calling recent Nobel laureates in physics and chemistry weak minded help you be a better person? What are you afraid might happen without this insulting stance against everyone that believes differently than you?

Who said it made me a better person? I sure didn't.

I do wonder who these Nobel laureates in physics and chemistry are, any citations?

 

[shortylickens]

Nobel prize means a lot less since they gave it to Gore and Obama for doing nothing.

 

[PowerEngineer]

PowerEngineer: I agree with you, justoh.

I appreciate the power of positive (and negative) thinking and of the placebo effect, and therefore do acknowledge that a belief can have beneficial (or harmful) effects in some cases even if that belief is demonstrably wrong. You can't seriously argue, however, that mistaken beliefs lead to good results in anything but a very small percentage of such cases.

M: How do you know? How many cases of this are there and how many have been studied. How is the truth of the mistaken nature of the situation determined? How do we determine whether a belief is beneficial or harmful? Do we trust the person who has the belief, consensus of some number of people, a panel of experts or maybe you?

I started by conceding DixyCrat's point that positive thinking can have beneficial results. You can argue that with DixyCrat if you disagree.

If you intend to argue that acting on mistaken beliefs leads to good results in more than a very small percentage of such cases, then you're welcome to do so.

PE: Attitude is certainly NOT everything.

M: How do you know? I am sure attitude isn't a chrome bumper or a flower bed, but that's not what is really meant by saying that attitude is everything. Attitude is everything but if it is wouldn't you have to have the attitude is everything attitude to know it? And you don't.

Attitude doesn't change reality. I'm pretty sure that your attitude toward jumping out of an airplane without a parachute or trying to stop a train by standing in front of it will not change the outcome. I suppose you're right in saying that I can't be absolutely sure until I try it, but I prefer to let you put your attitude to either one of those tests first.

PE: As an agnostic, I also acknowledge the possible existence of something supernatural even though I haven't yet seen sufficient reason to believe it exists.

M: But so far all we were talking about was positive and negative attitude and the placebo effect. How did we get off into the supernatural?.

Perhaps because this is a thread about prayer (presumably to a supernatural being of some sort).

PE: Perhaps faith leaves no room for uncertainty.

M: I'm not so sure, myself. It seems to me that experience is what leaves no room for uncertainty, like you know love is real by feeling it. You can't just have faith that love is real and know what love is and that it is real, no?.

It's my turn to be not so sure. Personal experience and personal feelings are not completely trustworthy. If they were, then we'd have to believe all those people who claim to have been abducted by alien.

PE: Still, it'd be refreshing if believers could similarly acknowledge that skeptics can reasonably not believe (rather than attributing nonbelief to self-hate, etc.).

M: Why? Why would you state that skepticism is reasonable and then want believers to agree that it is when you seem to think that belief is unreasonable?

Maybe it'd make more sense to you if the entire paragraph were read as a whole instead of being parsed into individual sentences.

Do you suffer some form of doubt you want me to assuage?

LOL Pretty condescending "attitude".

... So shut that stupid brain of yours up and look for the attitude that opens up your heart. There is only love, believe it or not.

<sigh>

Our brains are what set humans apart from other living things, and should be considered god's greatest gift to man (if you are so inclined to believe). Shutting our intellects off reduces us to animals, and would be a rejection of god's gift to you (again if you are so inclined to believe).

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Nobel prize means a lot less since they gave it to Gore and Obama for doing nothing.

In physics and chemistry?

Yea, I thought not. But then that doesn't much change the fact that you knew that already.

The point is that 'weak minded' is just an insult that billy here throws around when people don't agree with his world view.

Billy: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=list+of+nobel+laureates+by+religion

 

[WilliamM2]

The point is that 'weak minded' is just an insult that billy here throws around when people don't agree with his world view.

Odd, I don't think I've ever used that term here before.

Is Billy supposed to be some kind of insult? It's not working. I read several of the google links, didn't find anything. But then, why should I have to do all the work to back up your claim?

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Odd, I don't think I've ever used that term here before.

Is Billy supposed to be some kind of insult? It's not working. I read several of the google links, didn't find anything. But then, why should I have to do all the work to back up your claim?

My specific quote was off slightly. Clearly that changes the meaning in some nuanced way, otherwise you would look like a dishonest broker in this conversation. So please, regal us with the differences please, don't hold back, as this kind of nuanced argument clearly needs the kind detailed space that only someone in a strong state of mind can offer.

 

[WilliamM2]

My specific quote was off slightly. Clearly that changes the meaning in some nuanced way, otherwise you would look like a dishonest broker in this conversation. So please, regal us with the differences please, don't hold back, as this kind of nuanced argument clearly needs the kind detailed space that only someone in a strong state of mind can offer.

Please keep changing the subject, rather than provide us with the names of all those religious Nobel laureates in physics and chemistry...in the last ten years.

And don't lie about your quote being "slightly" off. Who's being dishonest?

 

[justoh]

It's quite easy to study physics and the other sciences while ignoring philosophy/history/humanities in general, and even if, to retain ones defect. Nobody is perfect. Constantly referring to scientists or nobel prize winners who were nonetheless religious is meaningless.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

It's quite easy to study physics and the other sciences while ignoring philosophy/history/humanities in general, and even if, to retain ones defect. Nobody is perfect. Constantly referring to scientists or nobel prize winners who were nonetheless religious is meaningless.

If you can't follow the conversation then please stay out of it.

Please keep changing the subject, rather than provide us with the names of all those religious Nobel laureates in physics and chemistry...in the last ten years.

And don't lie about your quote being "slightly" off. Who's being dishonest?

same for you.


The important conclusion here is that I've shown without equivocation that prayer works.

 

[WilliamM2]

And still no names...

 

[justoh]

And still no names...

They're constantly linking them. Must have missed it somehow. Many of them are deists and not theists, and therefore wouldn't be praying. All of them are meaningless appeals to authority. edit: oh, last 10 years. Doesn't seem particularly relevant though. It's just as bad as atheists saying that scientists in general aren't religious as if it means anything.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Assertions are not arguments.

You appear unable to recognize the arguments you are presented. I will attempt to re-state the argument in a simpler form, although I don't know if that is realistically possible.

They are not the same thing logically.

Indeed they are, for the reason given. A plan is a formalization of will, and an omnipotent being's will is never thwarted or impeded. That which God plans becomes reality, necessarily.

Look up the words in a dictionary.

How would that demonstrate anything?

Reality as we know it moves forward with time.

Does it?

Reality as it progresses conforms to God's plan.

Like abortions?

You continue to make contradictory claims. Particularly, your most recent claims contradict your earlier claim that prayers change reality. If in fact reality is predicated on God's plan -- which you have claimed is unchanging -- then it is impossible for prayers -- which are part of reality -- to change reality. The prayers and their "answers" were planned already.

I sometimes get the feeling that Christians believe blatantly contradictory things because it provides them with a sense of mysticism, hearkening the attributes of some zen koans or sutras of the eastern religions. I think more often than not, however, these Christian contradictions are plain and simple inconsistencies in their belief structure, indicative of its likely falsehood.