![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 16 of 16. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 5, 2002, at 10:09:23
Hi, everyone,
Does anyone have anything else they'd like to bring up? It would be nice to move on. I don't think you're *all* blocked...
Bob
Posted by Medusa on August 5, 2002, at 12:34:06
In reply to Moving on?, posted by Dr. Bob on August 5, 2002, at 10:09:23
Well, I'm new here, so I'm not blocked on anything ... besides mixing up the boards.
What percentages of posters on the faith board are religious? non-religious? formerly religious?
Dr Bob, are you religious?
> Hi, everyone,
>
> Does anyone have anything else they'd like to bring up? It would be nice to move on. I don't think you're *all* blocked...
>
> Bob
Posted by Ctrlaltndel on August 5, 2002, at 13:27:45
In reply to Moving on?, posted by Dr. Bob on August 5, 2002, at 10:09:23
Bob.....is this supposed to be on faith , or admin?
Posted by fachad on August 5, 2002, at 18:24:08
In reply to Re: Moving on?, posted by Medusa on August 5, 2002, at 12:34:06
I am formerly religious. My new favorite term is "deconverted" as described in the above thread.
fachad's standard Babble Faith Disclaimer:
My familiarity with religious ideas should not be mistaken for religious belief. I am an agnostic.
I not a Christian, I do not believe the Bible is the Word of God, nor do I believe in ANY revealed religion (i.e., religion that was revealed by God to some person or through some purported holy book.)
I am especially disdainful of religions that take mythological material, which is beautiful and meaningful in that it tells us about our collective unconscious, and claims that it is historical rather than mythical in nature.
*************************************************> Well, I'm new here, so I'm not blocked on anything ... besides mixing up the boards.
>
> What percentages of posters on the faith board are religious? non-religious? formerly religious?
>
> Dr Bob, are you religious?
>
>
>
> > Hi, everyone,
> >
> > Does anyone have anything else they'd like to bring up? It would be nice to move on. I don't think you're *all* blocked...
> >
> > Bob
>
>
Posted by Mr Beev on August 5, 2002, at 19:32:57
In reply to Re: Moving on? (Religious Status), posted by fachad on August 5, 2002, at 18:24:08
>I am an agnostic.
>
>I not a ChristianAs an agnostic, you might enjoy Clarence Darrow's (in)famous short essay:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/clarence_darrow/why_i_am_an_agnostic.html
and Bertrand Russell's equally (in)famous essay:
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/russell0.htm
Regards,
Mr Beev
Posted by Ritch on August 6, 2002, at 1:02:34
In reply to Re: Moving on? (Religious Status), posted by fachad on August 5, 2002, at 18:24:08
> I am formerly religious. My new favorite term is "deconverted" as described in the above thread.
>
> fachad's standard Babble Faith Disclaimer:
>
> My familiarity with religious ideas should not be mistaken for religious belief. I am an agnostic.
>
> I not a Christian, I do not believe the Bible is the Word of God, nor do I believe in ANY revealed religion (i.e., religion that was revealed by God to some person or through some purported holy book.)
>
> I am especially disdainful of religions that take mythological material, which is beautiful and meaningful in that it tells us about our collective unconscious, and claims that it is historical rather than mythical in nature.Fachad,
You would probably like Mark Twain then.. My religious status tends to change with my moods. It is kind of fun to be able to *anticipate* future spiritual beliefs based on mental status. Biology determines mentality, and mentality determines spirituality, and spirituality determines subjective reality? So is *that* subjective reality truly real?? :)
Mitch
Posted by fachad on August 6, 2002, at 1:30:20
In reply to Re: Moving on? (Religious Status) » fachad, posted by Ritch on August 6, 2002, at 1:02:34
>Biology determines mentality, and mentality determines spirituality, and spirituality determines subjective reality? So is *that* subjective reality truly real?? :)
I would question the exact meaning of the word "determines" in the above.
Although spirituality <depends> on mentality, which depends on biology which depends on physics, I don't think that necessitates hard determinism or reductive materialism.
Even hardcore reductive materialists will admit "emergent properties" of life, mind, and consciousness - emergent properties being qualities more than the sum of all the component parts, and not present in any of the parts.
Far from questioning the reality of subjective experience, I think it IS reality, as directly apprehended by conscious awareness, and the only reality that you can ever really know. Certainly objective evidence and intersubjective confirmation are critical criteria for evaluating the validity of truth claims, but ultimately truth and reality are only experienced subjectively...
Posted by Ritch on August 6, 2002, at 9:54:54
In reply to Against Determinism and Reductive Materalism » Ritch, posted by fachad on August 6, 2002, at 1:30:20
> >Biology determines mentality, and mentality determines spirituality, and spirituality determines subjective reality? So is *that* subjective reality truly real?? :)
>
> I would question the exact meaning of the word "determines" in the above.
>
> Although spirituality <depends> on mentality, which depends on biology which depends on physics, I don't think that necessitates hard determinism or reductive materialism.
>
> Even hardcore reductive materialists will admit "emergent properties" of life, mind, and consciousness - emergent properties being qualities more than the sum of all the component parts, and not present in any of the parts.
>
> Far from questioning the reality of subjective experience, I think it IS reality, as directly apprehended by conscious awareness, and the only reality that you can ever really know. Certainly objective evidence and intersubjective confirmation are critical criteria for evaluating the validity of truth claims, but ultimately truth and reality are only experienced subjectively...
>
I agree with your last statement. However, I am intrigued with the concept of "emergent properties" that you brought up. From the couple of philosophy classes I took in college, that sounds a lot like something I heard mentioned..I think it was "mystical residues"?? I can't remember what philosopher discussed this and if it relates or not..
Posted by Dinah on August 6, 2002, at 17:11:43
In reply to Moving on?, posted by Dr. Bob on August 5, 2002, at 10:09:23
I've thought and thought and I keep coming up blank.
Astonishing, isn't it?
Posted by paxvox on August 6, 2002, at 20:28:27
In reply to Moving on?, posted by Dr. Bob on August 5, 2002, at 10:09:23
The irony is thick and sweet......but I will try to move the que a bit.
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.
PAX
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?
Posted by Ritch on August 7, 2002, at 1:05:41
In reply to I can't think of a single thing to say., posted by Dinah on August 6, 2002, at 17:11:43
> I've thought and thought and I keep coming up blank.
>
> Astonishing, isn't it?
>
>Yes, I can't think of anything either. Just what are we supposed to be *moving on to*?
--"them loaded gravel trucks have 'heavy' written all over them"
Mitch
Posted by kiddo on August 7, 2002, at 1:37:48
In reply to Re: Moving on? » Dr. Bob, posted by paxvox on August 6, 2002, at 20:28:27
> 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?
Perhaps the people praying had enough faith for the others? Perhaps it was the "Where two or more gather and ask in My name...."? Perhaps it was just the right prayer and the right time in God's plan? Just thoughts....>
> 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.
>
> PAX
Why can't it be both? If you've had prayer answered before in the way you expected then perhaps that was part of it?
Just thinking out loud....
Kiddo
Posted by SandraDee on August 7, 2002, at 10:23:51
In reply to Re: Moving on... » paxvox, posted by kiddo on August 7, 2002, at 1:37:48
This is a long story - and I hope it doesn't offend anyone, I don't think it will, but who knows lately...
I have two stories that I believe really shine through that "it was of the Lord's doing". I don't want you to think I"m some cornball or something, even if I am, but I really believe this...
My husband and I were married in 97 and have been together since 91 (since we were 19).
We both wanted kids right after we got married and thought "my, haven't we been lucky all these years!" So we started trying shortly after the wedding. It wasn't working. I decided to see the doctor. She referred me to another doc who saw me about my hormones and what-not. No one ever saw hubby. So, I got perscribed (the first time I went to the referred guy) clomid (a fertility drug) after just a little blood work up. I got pro- something err other... to make me start a period and then clomid was to make the eggs come down. It was expensive, but not as expensive as some treatments. Anyhow, for two months I did that route. Third month I went to TWO clomid pills. The kind of thing you read about getting septuplets on. So, no results yet again, and since ins. didn't pay for any of it, I decided to quit. My whole thinking was that God made these doctors to know what to give me, so I needed their help. Anyhow, we relaxed as much as we could. I decided I was going to lose weight (I had a reunion to go to in 2 yrs) so I bought a pass to our local rec. center (it has a pool and stuff) and started working out and swimming. I only mention that because I know that part helped me too. The night before my birthday in 1998, I got down on my knees and prayed. I cried, "God I really want a family of my own... I'll be 27! I want a baby!! please please!! Make my cycles regular-without drugs, and let me fall pregnant." I got my period the VERY next day, my birthday.
Next month (28 days later) another period. Third month, no period and it was time for my physical. When they did the blood draw I asked them to check for pregnancy. It was positive. God's timing. I'm telling you. God knows I can barely handle what I've got, he knew not to make me pregnant when I was on 2 clomid pills. I really love my kids, and I wanted BOTH of them, I TRIED for both of them. Being a mom is exhausting and fun all in the same breath.
I had told so many people over the years to pray for us; that we wanted to have children. I always felt like God knew my heart, but it wasn't until I broke down and was at my lowest (even on my knees, literally)... that is when he was there for me. That's when he lifted me up. So when I'm asked if I believe in God and if I'm a Christian... Yes. Yes indeed. I do not think that was merely coincidence. Too many years of premarital sex and then the fertility drugs to be coincidental timing. It was God.
Sorry this is so long, it's an emotional and heartfelt thing for me, and that makes it very hard to shorten up.
I don't know how that fits in to Pax's question, but there ya have my input, whatever that's worth. :)
Posted by Dinah on August 7, 2002, at 17:44:35
In reply to Praying for others vs. Praying for yourself, posted by SandraDee on August 7, 2002, at 10:23:51
I can't imagine how sharing an experience that obviously meant so much to you could possibly be offensive to anyone. In fact, thank you for sharing it.
I definitely think sometimes that I just don't have the gift for prayer, and that may be why my view of it is different from yours. I am just so left brained and rational, that I often reduce spirituality to logic and am lacking in the capability for more mystical (I'm not sure if that is the right word) experiences. I am in a Sunday School class mostly filled with women who pray on a regular basis and share freely their intimate relationships with God through the Holy Spirit. I usually stare rather blankly, because that just isn't my experience. I really don't think I have that gift. But I see the happiness of the women who do, and I am glad for them.
Posted by SandraDee on August 7, 2002, at 19:43:40
In reply to Re: Praying for others vs. Praying for yourself » SandraDee, posted by Dinah on August 7, 2002, at 17:44:35
I'm sorry if I made it sound as though I'm some deep prayer warrior. I'm not. It's one of the things a fall so far short of, and why it stands out so much for me when my "prayer is answered".
I always feel guilty when I tell someone "I'll say a prayer for you" and then forget... so I try to do it right after I say that... sometimes stopping to pray with that person on the phone with them online. I learned that trick from another lady. I need to be better at it. I am hoping that my kids will help us get in check with things. Like prayer before bed and stuff...my little girl is still a bit to little for that yet, although we have done it some with her - just not regularly. Sorry if I gave off that impression... just I do believe in it, even though I'm not great at it.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Faith | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.