The belief in prayer, but not in God/afterlife

Post Reply New Topic

Correct, and you have just confused two different things as being the same.

"Natural processes" are going to happen, and no "will" (or at least no human "will") is ever going to change those processes or their results.

Correct ... and when my own personal goal was to enter into proper relationships with God and others so my natural instincts could be properly (or healthily) satisfied so I would no longer have to drink, certain "natural processes" (often wrongly attributed to mere psychology, philosophy and/or morality) made that possible.

I believe I've tried to discuss this with you before. It's the same old Gaps argument, at best.

You never were able to tease out whether an actual god exists and helped you,
or whether your BELIEF in an actual god made the difference.

I didn't think I was being ambiguous. I said prayer can't break the laws of physics (like making somebody's dong bigger, growing back arms, etc.) I think we're all connected, and if our prayers ARE answered in any way/shape/form, it comes through other people. I presented the idea that it might have a basis in science. I thought I also made it clear that I'm not sure if this is how it works. I also got a little rude because I felt he was pointing out my "error" when it didn't sound like he understood what I was saying in the first place.

The Deterministic viewpoint is too cumbersome for discussions involving the subjective. Will is, of course, governed by Law. And, equally as obvious is that those laws that control our will only lead to certain end results; I've never floated into the sky after wishing too, or expanded every lipid containing object in the universe to twice its size.

Yes ... and I no longer bother asking for someone else to be blessed (or even say "Bless you" to someone else) unless/until I am willing to participate!

You have misunderstood. I have agreed with you and I have said nothing about any "indication of god".


One question at a time please. Something or someone has/had done for me what I could not do for myself, and I now simply suspect (or have "come to believe") that was "God".


My belief or lack thereof made no difference at all. Rather, it was upon a simple willingness to believe that I took some specific action ... and then I "knew", so to speak.

I have not spoken of that at all. From wherever or however natural processes exist, natural processes as simply natural processes.


I am not aware of any laws controlling will. However, certain laws do seem to limit its abilities.


Of course not, and that is why.

How do you mean?

You had previously said, "I think we're all connected" at the beginning of the above, but I left that out when I quoted your post -- looking at just one thing at a time -- because I see that particular element a bit differently and only wanted to say what I did at that time ... but now looking more closely ...

We human beings have affects (manifestations) on one another (or on others), and we can even effect (cause to happen) certain things in relation to each another. All of that happens (and/or can only happen) within certain parameters ("natural laws") of course, but actually being "connected", as such, is not really required in order for those kinds of things to happen. Rather, and by default, we simply "need" each other in ways directly proportional to our abilities to affect and/or to effect. As a simple example:

We each/all need food, clothing (shelter) and fellowship (various types of interactions) in order to live here on earth. So, and regardless of his or her motive for making shoes (while praying for bread for the dinner table), the cobbler "blesses us" by making the shoes we need (and ends up being able to purchase bread) ... and my own "prayer" for a pair of shoes can only be met if/when the cobbler makes them and the truck driver delivers them (and the baker feeds everyone while earning his own keep) and so on.

In contrast, many people confuse Santa Claus with "God" and ask for things while expecting hot dogs to be squeezed (miraculously pushed in) through keyholes ... and that just does not "work" since no human being is involved.

There is new research that suggests that prayer activates the dopamine reward system in the brain. It's similiar to the Placebo effect, and studies associated with that phenomenon.

It's only common sense that when we have a positive attitude about something and we image something good in our future our brain chemistry changes and we are intrinsically rewarded for these kind of thoughts and imagery.

And on the other hand, if someone brings us bad news, we image the bad news, our brain chemistry changes, and we become depressed; it doesn't feel good, and if we adapt correctly we start to focus on more positive images in our mind, and gain better brain chemistry.

The process is extremely complex, but yet simple. Prayer is a structured way to gain positive thoughts and imagery. It doesn't matter what the goal is, as long as one perceives it as positive, they get an intrinsic reward for the postive thoughts and imagery. The key to prayer, is one may be motivated to practice it over and over in ritualized ways.

It's like cognitive behavioral therapy, but it has been around for thousands of years.

The motivation for prayer can come from many personal reasons, but the practice of the prayer, positive imagery, and an intrinsic reward, are the objective constants that we understand and are starting to be able to measure in science.

When one gains positive brain chemistry their physical behavior changes to reflect it and other humans notice the positive nature of it and are more likely to respond in a positive way toward the behavior. The result is, better opportunity for cooperation with others, and gains that may come from this cooperation. There are a multitude of other benefits that vary among individuals.

Prayer is an extra oar as we canoe down the river of live. It would be silly for a person to stop practicing prayer if it makes the journey a better one.

The ways in which we are connected as humans is not fully understood by science, and there may never be objective measurements, for us to gain close to full knowledge of it.

One interesting example I saw recently in Discover magazine, is mirror neurons and the ability some people have where they can actually feel touch when they see someone else being touched.

Before brain scans could measure the activity to provide evidence of this, if a person mentioned it, they might be thought of to have mental illness. And the individual reporting it might think it was some kind of mental telepathy.

I think we should leave open the possibility that we may have more capabilities in connection with others than what we normally associate with our five senses.

One other point, there is evidence that the placebo effect and prayer, doesn't work for some, as far as a measurable influence on the dopamine reward system in the brain. I don't think anyone understands why; it could be cognitive intent and/or differences in physical brain structure.

There are also those that don't receive a benefit from hypnosis.

If the reason prayer, placebo, and hypnosis does not work for some is associated with differences in the structure and functioning of the brain and the inability to gain an intrinsic reward from mental imagery, it's no wonder some of them have no use for the "power" of prayer, hypnosis, and/or the placebo effect.

I think I heard that on coast to coast AM. I was told an imbalance in dopamine reception, either way, can lead to intoxicated behaviour. I remember wondering if that's why some highly religious people seem deluded and moronic. But it still doesn't account for some athiest's thinking. I guess there's always natural stupidity.

Chances are some people are affected by dopamine or lack of dopamine too much, some just right, and some hardly any at all. I could imagine a whole "spectrum" of effect. It is possible that some that get little effect from dopamine, feel hardly anything at all from prayer.

And, on the other hand, the way one views prayer from a small child on up, could have an impact as well. Normally, if it doesn't feel good a person is less likely to repeat a behavior

I think emotion could be involved also, and hard to separate from the dopamine effect. Perhaps there is a relationship between people that feel less emotion, normal emotion, and too much emotion with religion, and all types of thoughts and things that can get attached to emotion.

I read a theory about the "extreme female brain", that suggests that there is a greater propensity there for the development of schizophrenia from extreme emotion and the personification of inanimate objects.

It is likely that those that experience a level of intoxication from dopamine live in a much different world than those that don't. It's doesn't seem surprising to me that they wouldn't see eye to eye on a number of things in life.

Maybe there is a, real, natural component, behind those with atheist views and those that "feel" a higher power.

It might be interesting to do a poll to see if those with strong emotion pray and those that consider themselves highly logical and experience lower levels of emotion don't pray. There is no science behind the subjective nature of it, but I still think it might be interesting.

I'd like to do it in the general area to get more response, but I don't think a poll like that would exist long in general discussion, before it got moved here.

Find me an atheist who dances around with snakes, murders abortion doctors, and flies planes into buildings because of her NON-belief in a deity.

I would wonder if such a theory wasn't largely-reliant on unproven presumptions about the sexes-
androcentricity has dominated the psychiatric community for centuries, and it continues to do harm to both sexes.

If the "extreme female brain" is Schizophrenic, and the "extreme male brain" is Autistic, we're in a lot of trouble.

I do see androcentricity in terminology; unfortunately that is what they call those two theories. I think better terms would have been extreme analytical brain vs. extreme emotional brain. A male can have an extreme emotional brain as well as a female with an extreme analytical brain, but it's not necessarily a measure of gender.

The Cohen test measures systemizing and empathy. But people that score extreme male on that test score closer to the middle of the female-male spectrum on other more comprehensive tests for determining brain gender. People that have taken those two tests on this website have reported this dichotomy.

There is no test I know of for the relationship to the "extreme female brain", other than a greater than 1.0 digit ratio for women and a high ratio for men, and the characteristic of personification of inanimate objects; and no conclusions can be drawn there only a vague correlation.

There is no doubt that that too many hormones or not enough hormones affect fetal brain development but resulting conditions may be affected by many other variables, as well.

They found a correlation between the "extreme female brain" and schizophrenia, but not cause and effect. Other genetic factors are likely in play.

I think it is the same with Autism. There is a correlation between testosterone in the womb, low digit ratio, and Autism; but there is also a correlation between testosterone in the womb, low digit ratio, and athletic ability, so there are obviously other factors at play there as well.