You can't disprove lack of faith!
So, I'm sitting at Miami International Airport, watching CNN Airport Network, and a report on a medical study comes on. This is how the New York Times reported on the same:
In fact, those aware of prayers being said for them did somewhat worse. The CNN report said much the same, but immediately added that "science can't prove or disprove the existence of god." We the viewers were then invited to comment on "whether science can ever prove faith."
What absolute baloney. Are we going to hear this boring question every time some religious claim is properly looked into? Many people think (and many churches maintain) that praying for someone's recovery is desirable and effective. This study concludes that, at least in the pretty general and wide format they went with, this is not true. Medical science 1, religion 0.
"But science can't disprove faith!" Who ever mentioned this? What sort of question is it anyway? No one doubts that Christians have faith - what we're skeptical of is that this faith does diddly for those in need of healthcare. Science can't "disprove" faith any more than it can disprove jealousy or tragedy. Let's get a bit more specific, or to put it more bluntly, more sincere. Daniel Dennett has recently been asking both camps to be more open and honest about their pros and cons. Ok, so it's possible that faith may provide psychological benefits to believers; let's look into it in a proper, organized way (that this way is the scientific way is rather obvious, sorry).
Look, had this study said that those prayed for recovered quicker, no Christian would be shrugging their shoulders, going "oh well, who cares. Science can't prove or disprove faith." They'd be proudly waving it around. So let's play fair; don't be a sore loser.
Prayers offered by strangers had no effect on the recovery of people who were undergoing heart surgery, a large and long-awaited study has found.
In fact, those aware of prayers being said for them did somewhat worse. The CNN report said much the same, but immediately added that "science can't prove or disprove the existence of god." We the viewers were then invited to comment on "whether science can ever prove faith."
What absolute baloney. Are we going to hear this boring question every time some religious claim is properly looked into? Many people think (and many churches maintain) that praying for someone's recovery is desirable and effective. This study concludes that, at least in the pretty general and wide format they went with, this is not true. Medical science 1, religion 0.
"But science can't disprove faith!" Who ever mentioned this? What sort of question is it anyway? No one doubts that Christians have faith - what we're skeptical of is that this faith does diddly for those in need of healthcare. Science can't "disprove" faith any more than it can disprove jealousy or tragedy. Let's get a bit more specific, or to put it more bluntly, more sincere. Daniel Dennett has recently been asking both camps to be more open and honest about their pros and cons. Ok, so it's possible that faith may provide psychological benefits to believers; let's look into it in a proper, organized way (that this way is the scientific way is rather obvious, sorry).
Look, had this study said that those prayed for recovered quicker, no Christian would be shrugging their shoulders, going "oh well, who cares. Science can't prove or disprove faith." They'd be proudly waving it around. So let's play fair; don't be a sore loser.
There are 1 Comments:
*sigh* ...We all know that God, in His infinite wisdom and power, intentionally manipulated the study results so that He could strengthen the faith of His followers. Those who stumbled were swayed by the arrogance of science and shall be doomed to burn forever in hellish lakes of fiery hellfire.
dude, like even santa will do this occasionally... gosh.
Post a Comment