Posted by Dinah on August 6, 2002, at 20:46:30
In reply to Re: Moving on? » Dr. Bob, posted by paxvox on August 6, 2002, at 20:28:27
>
> New line of thought:
>
> Survey: people in a double-blind trial who were prayed for by others (and didn't even know it) showed a statistically higher rate of recovery than those who were not. So, what does that mean, assuming the data is correct?
>
> Personal observation (i.e. empirical data):
> When I have had a particular problem, and knew people were praying for me, I *felt* better. So, was prayer, indeed, a positive component of this response, or was it a self-reenforcing aspect?
>
> OK.....I've done my part.
>
> Discuss.
>
> PAXI've always had problems with the idea of a God that personally intervenes, because it leaves open the question of why he doesn't always intervene. And, I'm sure unintentionally, there often seems to be the idea that if you just pray hard enough, God will intervene, and therefore if God didn't intervene, you must not have prayed hard enough. So I really infrequently pray for anything but strength or guidance, never miracles. Just my own view of God of course, and I know better than to think God is constrained by my view of him. :)
So I don't know what to make of the double blind studies. If they hold up to scrutiny, they will shake my view of what God is. And if they hold up, it will be hard to view the value as being placebo effect either.
So my answer is.... I don't know.
Does anyone know what happened with those studies? Was the methodology studied? Did they hold up to scrutiny?
poster:Dinah
thread:766
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faith/20020715/msgs/776.html