From the New Church Connection publication regarding Science and Religion – “Here’s a good reason to pray for people when they are in need: it works. Consider this famous study about prayer for others done by Randy Byrd: In 1988, as a cardiologist at the UCSF Medical Center, his double blind study of 393 cardiac patients showed that those prayed for by Christian prayer groups used in the study were five times less likely to require antibiotics, three times less likely to develop pulmonary edema, and, compared with the control group, fewer prayed-for-patients died.”
I did some research and this is an old case, and one that was reported under some controversy regarding what was considered “medically valid scoring”. Thankfully, newer and more thorough research has been done. The largest study of third-party prayer ever, recently published by Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer group, suggests that such prayer is not effective in reducing complications following heart surgery. The study also found that, of the 1,802 patients, those who knew they were receiving intercessory prayer fared worse.
What do you think?
CCD,
Ben
October 27, 2008 at 10:02 pm |
I believe in God but I never really believed in the power of prayer to help physically ailing people. That doesn’t really make sense to me. If God needs to take someone, He is going to take them. If someone needs to be comforted, He is going to comfort them. Why would person A asking God to do something for person B have any effect on the all-knowing, all-loving beings actions. Is He not already doing every possible good He can?
I think it’s silly personally and people who believe in its power most often just want to feel like they are doing something when in actuality they are doing nothing.
I never really got it. I don’t really like most religious people.
October 28, 2008 at 7:30 am |
I’m a New Church theological school student, and it frustrates me that they cited that study, which is bad science. I personally agree with Owen, that praying for another person isn’t going to change what God’s going to do – although I think it can still be valuable for the person doing the praying, since it opens her up to compassion and might lead to insight about how to help the person she’s praying for. Even if you DO think that it has more effect than this, it’s irresponsible to cite a faulty study with results that have not been shown to be reliable in subsequent tests. All it does is reinforce the stereotype of religious people as scientifically ignorant.
October 28, 2008 at 8:37 am |
Growing up in the NC, I grew to believe that science and religion were largely mutually exclusive. For example, Swedenborg teaches that much of the bible was largely allegorical, particularly the creation myth. Thus there is no conflict between the beginning of genesis and the mountains of evidence showing that the world is billions, rather than thousands, of years old. In other words, NC doctrine sidestepped much of the inherent conflict between science and religion be saying a) many parts of the bible that conflict with our modern understanding of how the world works of the did not literally happen (e.g. the flood) and b) those that did happen (e.g. Jesus’ miracles) aren’t happening any more.
I’m an atheist now, but I have a fondness for this philosophy. It recognizes that when religion tells science how to go about the business of scientific exploration, religion ends up looking silly. Unfortunately, this POV is not as widely held in the NC as I used to believe.
From intercessory prayer to homeopathy to natural selection, many people in the NC are more prone to magical thinking than I used to believe. In fairness, I should note that many other NC people, including the science faculty at the college and most of my relatives, do not fall into this silliness.
October 28, 2008 at 9:07 am |
I dig everyone’s comments on this so far. Nothing goes further to establish credibility/respectability in another for me than the ability to avoid the temptation to grab onto something that seems to add weight to your side of a debate/argument when you can see that it’s not a legitimate or credible point. It demonstrates a real interest in getting at the truth that goes beyond the hope or desire to be ‘right’ or convince others.
It reminds me of cheering at sporting events and hearing the vast majority of fans argue all calls that go against their team and support all calls against the other, even after a replay clearly shows what happened.
Prayer is interesting. Even when I believed most strongly, and prayed often because I understood this to be a portion of ‘my part’ of a healthy relationship with God, I never felt quite comfortable with it. I’m just sitting hear talking, and I’m not hearing anything back. And You already know all of my thoughts and feelings anyway, and if you wanted to give me an answer, you could do that while I sleep or drive or eat. I understand the theory that it might put me in a more receptive state, but when you think about how what we say and how we kneel and how we act in these situations, this is clearly much more about repeating a tradition/practice the way they people who taught us about prayer did it. Why kneel? Why close your eyes? Why fold your hands? Why say antiquated words that mean less to you than what’s in your heart? Obviously, I see the symbolism behind much of this and can see how it came to be this way, but the one-size fits all nature of it really took away from any sense I might have had that prayer was just me doing whatever I needed to do to feel as close to God and receptive as possible.
October 28, 2008 at 11:12 am |
Although I, like Thor and others, do not put any stock in prayer in terms of talking with God, I do think that it is an interesting phenomenon.
If you are a believer and you know that people are praying for you, will that have an unconscious impact on you? It might. I don’t know. Taking sugar pills can help you if you believe that they will.
For a long time, I used to have a very knee-jerk visceral reaction when people would say “I’ll pray for you.” I’d get a little pissed off, wondering why the hell they would think that was what I wanted. In my older and more temperate age, I am now at a point where I think that when a person tells me that, what they are really saying in different ways is “I hope everything comes out okay.” And in the end, isn’t that an awfully nice thing to say?
So, back to the question — does it work? I am doubtful that it has an inherent pragmatic impact when divorced of placebo type effects. But if I have any belief remaining in any higher power, I am quite sure that the only way to gain access to god/allah/infinity would be by way of personal seeking internally. Which is what I think prayer should be. If it should be anything.
“Wait, aren’t you one of them there atheists?”
I never said that, exactly. To clarify my position, I am quite sure that dogma and religion are inventions of mankind. And if there is truth in dogma, then there is just as much truth in Go Dog Go as well. But I do not know if there is a god, or if there are gods. I would say that it is much more likely that there is not than that there is, but I am open to all possibilities.
And if there is a god or gods, then I think that the ONLY way to “see” them (or him) is through some form of internal dialog that many would interpret as prayer. Does that help? It only helps the prayer. Not the prayed for, not that this sort of prayer is what you would use to pray “for” something anyway.
Does it work? Depends on what the intended outcome is.
October 28, 2008 at 11:42 am |
Pos,
I enjoyed your last post. As another blogger alluded to recently, I too respect and admire the trait of willingness to suspend judgment in the face of inconclusive evidence. I also genuinely am curious as to why you “would say that is much more likely that there is not than that there is” a god or gods in existence.
Maybe this is asking for a summary of the content of the last two hundred or so postings, (I’m not up to speed on all that’s gone on here), but even a few bullet points in the way of an answer would be of interest.
October 28, 2008 at 11:56 am |
Thanks Pos and Others,
(I must admit that I am developing a bias for Pos’ remarks – I will no longer be able read with suitable objectivity).
I have had a love-hate relationship with all things (or at least most things) that are kooky and magical.
I dislike them because, well, they are kooky.
I like them because they are entertaining, fascinating and, well, magical.
Things that fall into this catagory for me are homeopathy, reiki, intercessary prayer, the more spiritual side of many martial arts – especially yoga and on and on, witch doctor healing (I’m not that interested in Ghosts or Aliens)
The problem with all of these things is that they don’t seem scientifically sound and they are way to subject to the placebo effect. But a recent thought I had was, “what if we don’t say, “oh well, that’s just the placebo effect” but instead say, “Yes! That’s the Placebo effect!”
Let’s leave the possible existence of God and spirit out of the picture. I think many materialists would agree that the human brain and the experience of “mind” is a pretty exciting arena. Since we know that the placebo effect has a positive impact, why not embrace it?
If thinking happy thoughts can rapidly increase the healing process lets find as many ways to think happy thoughts as possible.
We just treat placebo effect perjoritively. What if we thought of mind-centered healing as the top of the chart rather than the bottom?
Here’s an example of one approach to this: http://biophysicscenter.com/. The attempt here is to use machines and methods to get objective measurable data which then guides the healing modalities focussed on the holistic person. The process is understood in terms of physics (though I know nothing about the validity of the physics).
In fact, I hope to open a product line of drugs called “Placebo”. They will each be sugar pills but bottled seperately to deal with colds, coughs, sore throats, etc.
If the FDA were honest they would have to say that placebos have been repetedly shown to be effective in curing these ailments. I would also sell more expensive placebos for the really bad cases because the more a person pays for my sugar the more they will associate it with value.
Brian
October 28, 2008 at 11:59 am |
Sophia — here’s the summary of my view on it… The evidence I have personally seen stacks much more in favor of “no god” than “god.” I have never “seen” god(s). (I don’t believe in ghosts either.) I have seen a lot of evidence that things that people attribute to god are easily explainable by much simpler means, and applying Occam’s Razor, I think that the simpler answers are usually the better ones.
That said, if I go to bed tonight and God (I mean, real God, not some guy dressed up like him) stands at the foot of my bed, turns some water into wine, and says “So, what else do I have to do?” I’ll probably respond “Nothing. Thank you. Now I know.”
October 28, 2008 at 11:59 am |
Ben — a bias huh? A good bias or a bad one?
October 28, 2008 at 12:01 pm |
whoops — I am an idiot. not Ben, but Brian. Sorry.
October 28, 2008 at 1:29 pm |
a good bias. I like what you have to say.
October 28, 2008 at 1:34 pm |
Aw shucks. And I didn’t get you anything…
Well, I just calls em like I sees em. Thanks for the positive feedback.
October 28, 2008 at 2:03 pm |
I have been a big pray-er for a while. Back in my religious days (not all that long ago) I “talked” to God through out my day. I didn’t really think that He needed instructions from me regarding how to run my life. I prayed to help myself process my thoughts, and I was comforted by the sense that another being was with me in my crazy head. Plus, sometimes I need company when the majority of my time is spent with a couple of toddlers.
I prayed for other people, too. Again, I didn’t expect that it would change anything. But it helped open my heart and feel compassion for them.
I found great comfort in standard religious prayers. They calmed me and gave me a sense that God was in charge, not me. I said them with my children before meals and at night.
Prayer has been a great tool for me. So, how do I pray if I don’t really believe in God? I love it as a way to calm my mind and get in touch with my inner guidance (who I would be if not for all the pride, judgement and fear). I use it to express gratitude. I like the way it centers me before a meal and before bed. I want to teach my children this tool. I’m just not sure how to do it if it’s not praying to something.
My personal prayers have become more meditations. With the kids, we talk about being grateful for the meal, or whatever. We say some of the standard prayers, changing some of the words to reflect our beliefs now. The Johnny Appleseed song has become (The Earth is good to me . . . ).
I’m interested if some of the other atheists out there pray, or do something that fulfills that role. I’m particularly interested if you “pray” with your children.
thanks,
Megan
October 28, 2008 at 4:19 pm |
Perhaps when a person feels that they “need” everyone’s prayers…they begin to feel like they are not going to make it and it has the effect of not “working” for them…I don’t know…
I think that loving thoughts and feelings out on the wave length for those that need it or want it…can’t hurt…however I don’t pray…I would think good loving thoughts about the person and their needs and send it out to the universe (kind a like Reiki) …there is something to be said for the power of positive thinking in patient recovery or at least …so say many cancer patients.
October 28, 2008 at 4:57 pm |
Brian, interesting thoughts on the Placebo effect. I think we should be studying the human brain as aggressively as possible, and I agree with you that if thinking happy thoughts can rapidly increase the healing process lets find as many ways to think happy thoughts as possible. I think the more we understand what the brain is doing, and why the Placebo effect works the way it does, the more we’ll be able to harness the power of the human brain/mind (and the more we’ll be able to get away from ancient superstitions/practices).
I used to pray like the dickens. It was a very real part of my life. Generally, I didn’t pray for ‘acts of God’, but used it more as a meditative way of getting in touch with God and allowing Him to ‘flow’ into me. I still believe in meditation, but I simply don’t think I’m talking to anyone but myself. I love it, though. Internal diaologue, active meditation, breathing techniques, yoga, etc. are all methods that I find useful to my personal happiness and my connection to the Universe. I don’t have kids, Megan, but I think if I did, I would certaily teach them certain things that I found similar to prayer, and would certainly do my best to teach them how to choose an active participation in problem solving, too.
I find myself having the reaction, these days, that I’d prefer people just said, “I’m thinking of you, and I love you”, instead of “I’m praying for you”. I don’t think they’re actual PRAYER requests are doing anything. And above even their positive thoughts & passive love, I’d MUCH prefer that people become ACTIVE in their fight against an ailment or predicament by donating or participating in science, or a charity.
CCD,
Ben
October 28, 2008 at 5:54 pm |
In response to Gwen,
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t Reiki equally as unsubstantiated as God? (With the exception of a possible placebo effect).
“loving thoughts and feelings out on the wave length” “sending stuff out to the Universe?”
I have no problem if you want to send messages and intentions out to the universe or if you imagine a thought wave length of interconnected group consciousness. But this sounds to me like another name for prayer and another name for God. Much like an Eastern conception of the Oneness and energetic connection between spiritual beings.
That’s kind of cool. However, it is equally as suspect as any other conception of spiritual reality.
Unless I misunderstand you. Perhaps you are speaking in metaphor and don’t actually think that what you describe has any impact.
Dr Phil
October 29, 2008 at 7:58 am |
I understand the concept of the placebo effect but I don’t know any statistics. Would it be considered “supernatural” in the sense that the cause and effect don’t match in any scientific way? Does the placebo effect work with all people or just on the superstitious?
Peace,
Corvus
“Nevermore”
October 29, 2008 at 8:56 am |
Dr Phil,
I believe that there is a life force energy in our universe…there is energy between people…some good and some bad… if we can use this energy for good in our lives…then all the better. I don’t purposefully sit and think about someone and send the message out…I have good thoughts about someone or think about my children alot one day…and I believe that good energy and those loving thougts go out somewhere…somehow and it may or may not affect others…I do not know.
Reiki is a Japanese technique for relaxation and stress release. It is meant to promote healing. It is administered by “laying on hands” and is based on the idea that an unseen “life force energy” flows through us giving us life, if you will. If one’s “life force energy” is low, then (according to my friends) we are more likely to get sick or feel stress, and if it is high, we are more capable of being happy and healthy. I believe Rei means God and ki means life force…so the assumption since it was named as it was, that God provides this healing. Whcih came first the chicken or the egg…I mean did someone do this kind of healing and then say lets attribute this to God and the life force from God??? i do not know.
Reiki is spiritual in nature. It heals your spirit. It is not a religion. It has no dogma, and there is nothing you must believe in order to learn about or use Reiki. in your life. Reiki will work whether you believe in it or not…apparently. I only know this from talking to four people that have had reiki treatments…and a friend that is a Reiki master. I have not experienced this myself.
Yoga and meditating and breathing correctly do the same thing for me. My energy level increases and my attention span increases and I feel relaxed and ready to go after a yoga session. It promotes healthy happy living in my life. It does not direct me to believe in a god and has no dogma…it is does heal my muscles and my spirit at the same time. I believe in living in the moment as much as possible.
I have a hard time with the concept of God and all the dogma surrounding religions. I believe that one can lead a good and useful life…a loving life even without having to attribute everything to God…it seems to me that people attribute all good things to God and thank “him” for that in their lives…then when something bad/sad/unwelcome happens in their lives…they cry out…why me God…what is wrong ….and attribute the evil or badness to god as well…seems I learned from my early childhood that good is attributed to God and evil is attributed to people…so…..THAT totally got my attention and I did not like that answer…and I still say… I DONT KNOW…I am not saying there ISNT a god…or goddess or Gods and Goddesses…I am saying I do not know and actually believe no one can KNOW…and what I know and have learned about God through my religious upbringing and life…doesn’t help my belief and certainly has furthered my unbelief.
October 29, 2008 at 11:58 am |
Gwen,
Dogma is bad but belief in spirits is ok?
So (to you) dogma must mean a belief pushed on you rather than a belief which you cannot back up with scientific evidence?
If I believe in fairies but I don’t tell anyone else that fairies exist then I am not dogmatic?
Brian
October 29, 2008 at 1:06 pm |
This is an interesting topic.
My guess (and that’s all it is) is that Gwen is talking about an experiential hunch/impression that she is communicating vaguely to avoid any claims about specific mechanisms or agents. I think this is an attempt at communicating an unexplained experience while trying to avoid tacking on dogmatic claims. Perhaps she hasn’t succeeded 100%, but I expect the intention is there.
What is a “force for good”? Or a “positive energy in the universe”? I don’t know, but I certainly can identify with the idea that good things tend to happen when we are intentionally loving and supportive toward one another… we can affect each other in all sorts of positive ways. Is it “stuff”? or is it all psychological? That matters if you’re trying to explain/claim what is true, and what mechanisms are behind it, but not as much if you are mostly just attempting to describe an experiential hunch pragmatically.
Talking about ’spirituality’ and our ’spirits’ can be a useful way to communicate about the experiencing of and communicating about thoughts, emotions, love, subconscious/intuitive thought, etc. We need not insist that there is a supernatural mechanism behind it to take advantage of this way of thinking about it.
The key is saying that we don’t know. (Until/unless we do know more.) We might find that a certain type of exercise or healing or meditation or such allows us to feel happier and more peaceful, and (perhaps only through this change in ourselves, perhaps not) this may affect other people. It’s okay to have a hunch that there is some supernatural or simply unexplained natural mechanism behind this experience we have, and it’s okay to suspect that there is not. But we don’t know, so we say, “I don’t know.”
To me, dogma is when we take our wild guesses or conceptualizations about these experiences and decide this is True (and not simply a helpful way to visualize it.) Then we pass that “Truth” off to others without the “I don’t know” attached.
I don’t believe it’s dogmatic to say “My experiences give me a hunch that there is a loving being that directs all things for good, and I like to call that being God. I don’t know if this God exists as I (or usually others) have conceptualized Him/Her/It.”
October 29, 2008 at 1:19 pm |
I just did it again…I used the word believe in a different context than I could have. I could have said I think that there is a life force out there…and I do think of my inner life as my spirit.
One says wow she is a spirited person or that horse is spirited …meaning their personality if LIVELY…alive like…right. That is what I mean about spirit.
I fall more on the agnostic side…than atheistic. I don’t have any answsers. I do not like dogma whether it is a belief structure “pushed “on people as you said or something that cannot be backed up by science…they both tax my spirit!:)
no you are probably afraid of not being accepted because you believe in fairies.
October 29, 2008 at 1:28 pm |
Thor,
I liked your last post. You state:
“I don’t believe it’s dogmatic to say “My experiences give me a hunch that there is a loving being that directs all things for good, and I like to call that being God. I don’t know if this God exists as I (or usually others) have conceptualized Him/Her/It.””
I’m on board with that!
I don’t think a belief need imply certitude or knowledge, so I also think it is consistent with the above statement to say, in my case, that I believe in God. Arguably, one can believe in something without dogmatically asserting its truth and while still leaving room for doubt even in the mind of the belief holder.
Maybe the main locus of disagreement of many of those who post here lies in semantics. I don’t know, just a thought.
October 29, 2008 at 3:24 pm |
Thanks Thor…I obviously could not have said it better myself. I was trying to explain a hunch…an impression without putting some kind of tag on it…to make it one way or another…I do not know…I said that…above…one thing I do know is positive/loving/kind energy between people can be a force for healing/happiness/good…how is that…better?
Sometimes I think I should just read and not put my thoughts out here…you all are so intellectually competent…and I feel out of my league. I really like reading the ideas here and sharing this blog with my friends. We have had some great conversations thanks to this blog.
October 30, 2008 at 4:44 am |
Gwen – speaking for myself, I’m not really all that competent. I’m just well trained in expressing my ideas. I am sure you are very intellectually competent but maybe have challenges trying to find the right words for your ideas. That’s more mechanical than intellectual.
Now, about positive energy and better outcomes and all of that. If I go into a party and I am in a good mood, and in a positive frame of mind, and I am friendly to people, I tend to have a good time. And others around me seem to have a good time as well. If I am in a bad mood, and I am surly, etc., I tend to have a less good time, and those around me tend to have a less good time.
I don’t know what this has to do with “spirits” or “souls” or anything. But from a psychological and sociological perspective it stands to reason that positive people bring positive results. It’s infectious. It just spreads, virally. As does negativity.
But here’s an interesting thing — anecdotally as well, by the way. When my wife is angry, she tends to bring everyone around her down. But if I go to the next room and ignore her, that impact is ameliorated. And if I’m at work, and I don’t know about it, it has no impact on me at all. Well, not until I get home.
There is an NPR show that I like listening to a lot — called RadioLab. (http://www.wnyc.org/shows/radiolab/) They do a podcast, and I can’t actually recommend it enough. They talk about scientific things and human phenomena like multiverses and mortality and sense of self and morality and all sorts of concepts. By happy coincidence I was listening to an old episode yesterday (“Where am I”) in which they discussed the idea that one’s emotional responses are part of a biofeedback loop between the body and the brain. I find that somewhat interesting given the concept on the table here. They say that people who are paralyzed tend to experience less intense emotional highs and lows.
So if our emotional ups and downs are so so dependent on chemical reactions and physical responses in our bodies, how can we say what sort of an effect that people praying for us has on us? Especially if we aren’t even aware of it?
October 30, 2008 at 7:54 am |
Putting my thinking gears in motion with my coffee this morning
I pulled up this blog to see what everyone on the blog is up to today. Thanks for the note of encouragement POS (your name is too long to remember how to spell it)
I often think that there is some idea or test program/study/ that can show you all sides to almost anything that we wonder about if we take the time to research it…ok not everything, but alot… as i read your comments Pos, I agree that positivity is infectious , the same for negativity. The impact being on those directly around us. I have also been rethinking my ideas about the affect that my good thoughts might have on the ones I love.
I found it fascinating information about the biofeedback with regards to people who are paralyzed.
I suppose the effect that prayer has is IN the pray-er… and not the prayees!!
If asked Do you pray? I would say no. Perhaps yoga,meditation and thinking loving thoughts about others can be seen by some as prayer…but not to me.
Symantecs…that is the way in which the word is used…sometimes the user means something different than others read it to mean…correct? so…again up above Pos you say you don’t know what this has to do with “spirits and souls” I never meant to use that word in that context…, I was thinking of it more in the way of saying someone is a spirited (positive energy)person.
October 30, 2008 at 9:11 am |
Gwen,
Sorry to be challenging. Please keep posting if you have thoughts. If we are having a technical argument then it is important to try to use precise expressions. But, you didn’t sign up for a technical argument, so sorry to take your words that way.
Brian
October 30, 2008 at 1:15 pm |
This is interesting. I’m pleasantly surprised to find agnostic people talking in favor of things that I think of as prayer. (Another inaccurate assumption about agnostic people bites the dust.)
As Coleman said earlier, I’m frustrated that poor science was used to make a case for the usefulness of intercessory prayer. If people here are interested in reading a better NC argument for the usefulness of praying for other people I invite you to wander over to this post on my blog (look for the comment that quotes a pamphlet by Jeremy Simons). The interesting thing to me is that the argument made there is pretty similar to what some people here have been talking about – sending positive energy to people etc.
I’m not sure whether I think praying for other people always helps them. I’m comfortable with the idea that in some cases it does help the person being prayed for. I think we affect one another on a spiritual level. I think that that’s what’s happening when our mood is affected by the “vibe” of a party or the innocence of a toddler. Prayer for another person – or sending positive energy their way, if you prefer – seems like another way that we could affect one another spiritually. It seems like we would be more able to do that for people we are already more connected to spiritually (spouses, family, close friends).
As has already been said, I don’t think that praying for another person is a matter of convincing God to do something different than what he was planning to do. But I also don’t like the idea of removing God from the picture entirely. I see God as the source of all positive energy – all love, healing etc. – and so I see any good effect that I’m able to have on another person – whether through prayer, visiting them in the hospital, or providing them with medical care (if I knew how) – as coming from God and not me in the first place.
Malcolm
November 9, 2008 at 7:59 pm |
I find prayers effective, though I am aware that it cannot solve any problems. However, in times when I have some sleepless nights, when problems are hunting me, I pray, and I don’t know, maybe it’s just a matter of faith because I feel some peace of mind and I just realize that it is already another day to face.
It will not harm you if you pray.
John