If prayers go unanswered....?

Well, this essentially has been done a few times, analyzing the "power of prayer" on disease outcomes. Basically, no significant effect of prayer has been found in these studies, with a couple of exceptions - but take note; those "couple of exceptions" were later shown to be incorrect due to misuse and misanalysis of the data. I believe in one recent case involving cardiac outcomes there was an investigation and reprimand (if not firing) of researchers since it appeared they deliberately misused their data to support the hypothesis that prayer improves outcome.Here is an excerpt from a review regarding this subject: Other studies are mentioned, including some problematic ones.

I think schraf missed an important factor on her list (which you seem to have misinterpreted anyway)...Have you ever heard of the "placebo effect"?People have reported being cured or having their symptoms alleviated after given a drug by their doctor - however, what their doctor really had given them was an empty pill without any bioactivity. The strong link of mental/emotional and physical health reveals itself in the placebo effect - people are psychologically convinced they will get better because of the "drug" they are given and their health (or perception of their health) improves.You had a situation where you prayed and quickly felt better - how do we know that this wasn't a self-induced placebo effect? Perhaps you were psychologically (rather than spiritually) convinced that you would get better, and so you did. I'm not trying to belittle your spirituality here - I'm simply asking how you or the anyone else would know the difference.There have been reports that religious activity improves health (specifically praying for one's own health alone or with others, and attending religious services). Though these studies might seem to support your position, once controlled for other factors, religion as a significant factor falls away. It turns out what really helps people get better is a sense of family, community, support, belonging, and self-reflection. It doesn't seem to matter whether these are religious/spiritual or secular when it comes to patient outcomes.

Since there are peer-reviewed papers showing the power of prayer in healing, you shouldn't be so ridiculing (not to mention condescending, my dear little boy). Mike - I'm not sure why you don't see that "God" is the most complicated explanation that can be given for a scenario.I stub my toe; two of the explanations I come up with:1) I wasn't paying enough attention to notice someone had moved the coffee table.2) An infinite, eternal, omnipotent, omnicient, undetectable being caused me to stub my toe.Which explanation appears more complicated to you?I think you see "Goddidit" as a non-complicated explanation because it is short, sweet, and can explain everything. But that explanation really ends up explaining nothing, and predicting nothing.What causes AIDS?
Goddidit.Why did Frank develop cancer?
Goddidit.Why do only some people die from pneumonia?
Goddidit.What caused my diarrhea this morning?
Goddidit.Why do smokers die younger than non-smokers?
Goddidit.You see mike, your God explanation is simple in that it can answer any question. However, it is so complicated that it really answers none of them.If we "simply" used your "complicated" explanation the entire field of medicine would not exist, and our life expectancies would probably be half of what they are today.

Yep - I was glad to see you came back...Also, I wasn't trying to claim that you use "Goddidit" as a universal explanation - I was trying to show that "Goddidit" is a very complicated, and very poor explanation when it comes to actually explaining physical phenomena and doing anything about them (like curing disease). But not really - I still have a problem with this statement. Perhaps it "explains everything" in a philosophical or spiritual sense, but that doesn't really help me determine if a potential drug is going to cause dangerous toxicity in a subset of patients.Some people claim that String Theory may be the "universal theory" that encompasses everything - even if this turns out to be the case, String Theory as I understand it won't be able to help us cure disease, or develop disease-resistant crops, or build safer vehicles, or solve many issues in scientific study where "smaller" theories will do a much better job towards explanation and prediction. Your God explanation is along the lines of such a "universal theory" - it works for you to explain everything, but it is so abstract and all encompassing that it explains nothing. The Theory of Evolution explains very, very, very little about the natural universe. If you only believe in things that explain everything, than there is absolutely nothing in science or the natural world that you believe. I guess I'm confused then. God is the explanation for everything, but he is not the explanation for Frank's cancer? and He isn't the least involved in many things?(God is involved in everything but not everything. Sounds like your complicated "simple" explanation is getting more and more complicated...)My interest in the thread was spurned by your comment that you knew you were rapidly healed through prayer. - If "God isn't the least involved in things you might expect to see", then how can you be so sure that He was involved in your rapid recovery? Or that He wasn't involved in Frank's affliction? Okay, but haven't you been consistently stating that your prayers have been answered? It seems to me that you have been making claims about setting the criteria and knowing them fulfilled by God.The important point for me:My primary issue with many of your statements is your claim definitively know that your prayers were answered. I don't believe you can separate a "true answer" from a "coincidental" or "self-fulfilling" one.An answer of simply "I just know" or "faith" seems a circular argument to me - I know because I know because I know because....(Also, if you get a chance you may want to peruse posts 63 & 64 if you missed them, they may be of interest).

(No problem - take your time if you're stretched thin.) Right - that's what I was trying to get to at the end of my post:How do you know your prayers were answered?If you have evidence that God answered your prayers, perhaps God is the "simplest explanation".If you have no evidence except the fact that you prayed, explanations based on psychology (placebo effect) or physiology (immune system) are simpler explanations given the evidence.Your "evidence" is likely faith - if so, we can conclude this discussion (on good terms) as reaching another science vs. faith impasse. However, if you want to discuss naturalistic evidence for answered prayers I'd be interested in continuing.

But the knowledge is not necessarily true.By example, a paranoid schizophrenic may have the knowledge that he was slapped, but that does not make it true.I have had a few people very close to me have hallucinations related to medical problems; these hallucinations seem like "knowledge" to them. My post-stroke grandfather has "knowledge" of huge parts of his life history that never happened, even though he is otherwise generally sane and lucid.Does he "know" the "truth"? No - but rather than try to give my own reasons, I'll ask the following (I'm particularly interested to see your answer).What is the specific difference between the two cases you describe? I believe so, and there is at least a small body of scientific evidence to suggest that this is the case.One general theme of these studies seems to be - People benefit medically from "prayer" only when they know they are being prayed for. That is, the "prayee" must be psychologically aware that prayer is happening on their behalf, otherwise they receive no benefit. If prayer worked purely in a spiritual sense, it should benefit the patient regardless of their ignorance to the praying.I think that is very strong evidence that prayer does NOT work via spiritual means. But you yourself state that you would have just as likely gotten no effect, or the opposite the desired effect.Therefore it is not at all like a prediction of science, since your "prediction" holds true for any possible outcome, no matter how good or bad.

It has been otherwise. Clinical studies have been published demonstrating a positive effect of prayer on outcome, when the person whose outcome was in question was aware of the prayer or took part in the prayer.In order to separate natural from supernatural effects, studies were set up where the patient and medical staff did not know who was being prayed for. In these studies no legitimate significant difference has been found yet. As see, so as soon as a study is put into place to detect God, God will change Himself in order to avoid detection. (Just like the A-Team!)If God lets people die of disease that He would have otherwise saved, simply to avoid the possibility of registering a statistical anomaly in a small clinical trial, then God is not a very nice guy...

Hey Mike you never answered my post #73, which I think tends to refute the point you continue to make: What if you were hallucinating that you were slapped? Then you would know that you were slapped, even though the truth is that you were not slapped.Have you ever experienced someone in a hallucinatory state? They have knowledge of things happening, such as being attacked, even though those things never happened.As I stated before, since my grandfather had a stroke he recounts detailed stories about his life history that never happened.Get it? Just because you think you have knowledge does not make that knowledge true.Hopefully you will respond to this point this time since you seem to have dismissed Schraf's other arguments based on this point, which I believe you have quite wrong.

What if you were hallucinating during your deduction, just like you hallucinated that you were slapped?

Actually, yes I did. I was given accounts of things that supposedly happened in someone's life history. The memory of several other close family members was that those accounts were false, and they all concurred and additionally could agree on what had really happened.Frankly, I remain tentative on many of the probably false memories that involve smaller details, it may simply be the case that others didn't take note and remember the details, or it was something that was kept from them.When it comes to more grandiose false memories that could not have gone unnoticed by immediate relatives, the certainty that those memories are false are much higher.My point to this whole line of discussion is that you know that you were rapidly healed as a result of prayer, but we have no way of knowing if that is the truth separate of your own claim, which is likely biased and out of touch with reality (not an insult - this would apply to just about anyone, particularly in an intense moment of physical illness and spiritual pleading). Unfortunately I have a problem with that as well - the reasoning of "I must believe to see the evidence, but I must look at evidence to believe."Evidence must stand separate of faith; otherwise it ceases to be evidence.