can an athiest get any benifit from a faith healer

the_pen_turner

a relative of mine has the shingles and has went to the doctor for tablets
he has also went to see a quack.
I don't care what he does once it helps him.

it got me thinking that if I got shingles , what would I do.
im atheist

do you think there is any benefit of faith healers to an atheist

lazygal

There's no benefit to anyone of faith healers.

the_pen_turner

I agree but loads of people claim that it works.
I put all this down to the placebo affect but that only works if you believe it to be true

echo beach

An atheist is a person who doesn't believe in God. I don't know if there is a word for a person who doesn't believe in faith healers.

lazygal

echo beach wrote: »

An atheist is a person who doesn't believe in God. I don't know if there is a word for a person who doesn't believe in faith healers.

Sensible?

faithiest

looksee

It would have to be afaitheist.

Calibos

Jaysus, Ripe for the oul reconversion this one is!

the_pen_turner

god I hope not;););););):eek::eek::eek::D

Spanish Eyes

Anti viral meds at the first sign will sort it out. GP first.

smacl

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I agree but loads of people claim that it works.
I put all this down to the placebo affect but that only works if you believe it to be true

But placebos do work in situations where stronger medical intervention isn't required and the patient basically needs rest and reassurance that they're on the mend. Similarly faith healers, homeopathy, prayer, ki massage, and various other kinds of mumbo jumbo. The relaxation response covers this quite well, and basically illustrates by my reading that placebos are basically a form of faith healing. As you say, they require belief / trust / faith. At the same time, their efficacy is limited to contexts for which they're appropriate, so I wouldn't be rushing out to buying shares in homeopathic contraceptives just yet. :pac:

mr.anonymous

A good laugh cures more than you think.

echo beach

There is also a nocebo effect where an inactive substance can make you ill. Those getting placebos in a trial often have as many, or more, side-effects than those getting the drug. So what is making you well or giving you side-effects?
Most illnesses are self-limiting, which means that you will eventually get better if you do nothing. In practice most of us attribute our 'cure' to whatever treatment we were on when it happened. That is why a faith healers often has success when 'everything else' has failed.

It is the same as the phenomenon of always finding your keys in the last place you look.

endacl

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I agree but loads of people claim that it works.
I put all this down to the placebo affect but that only works if you believe it to be true

Loads of people claim a thing works =/= a thing works.

wokingvoter

If you don't have to pay the faith healer/make a donation and you think it will help him to feel more positive about this painful condition then it really can't do any harm.
There are no rules to being an atheist.
you don't need permission or approval from anybody or anything.
The only thing I would say is don't allow him to think that the faith healer can replace conventional medicine, it can't.

smacl

wokingvoter wrote: »

If you don't have to pay the faith healer/make a donation and you think it will help him to feel more positive about this painful condition then it really can't do any harm.

The problem here with faith healers, homeopathy, etc... is that the person going to them might believe they've taken action to treat their problem, where they might actually need proper medical intervention. People can and do die from this. A good article here on this effect, one of many.

So to answer the OPs question, if he/she gets shingles, go see a doctor. It is a condition that is unpleasant enough, typically needs medical treatment, and can be dangerous to the elderly. Never go to the faith healer first, as you might delay proper necessary medical intervention with dire consequences.

looksee

In fact shingles would be one of the better examples of a faith healer apparently being effective. It can't be cured, but medication can ease the pain, and it would normally clear up on its own, though it takes a while. Anti viral medication can stop it from getting any worse, but if a random joe went to a faith healer he would find his shingles cleared up, but it would have done anyway.

smacl

looksee wrote: »

In fact shingles would be one of the better examples of a faith healer apparently being effective. It can't be cured, but medication can ease the pain, and it would normally clear up on its own, though it takes a while. Anti viral medication can stop it from getting any worse, but if a random joe went to a faith healer he would find his shingles cleared up, but it would have done anyway.

I'd have to disagree strongly here. My father had shingles in his early 80s which were left untreated as he didn't tell us about them and living along we didn't pick up on them in time. He ended up very sick as a result and never really recovered. The fact that in many cases they clear up by themselves does not mean that faith healing represents a viable alternative for proper medical treatment where it is required. You will only know if medical treatment is required by visiting your GP. Having done this, if you think a faith healer could help, then visit one by all means.

While complimentary medicine can be beneficial in that it does not attempt to circumvent conventional medicine, alternative medicine can be dangerous because it does.

looksee

smacl wrote: »

I'd have to disagree strongly here. My father had shingles in his early 80s which were left untreated as he didn't tell us about them and living along we didn't pick up on them in time. He ended up very sick as a result and never really recovered. The fact that in many cases they clear up by themselves does not mean that faith healing represents a viable alternative for proper medical treatment where it is required. You will only know if medical treatment is required by visiting your GP. Having done this, if you think a faith healer could help, then visit one by all means.

While complimentary medicine can be beneficial in that it does not attempt to circumvent conventional medicine, alternative medicine can be dangerous because it does.

You are misunderstanding me. I do not dispute that a person with shingles should consult their doctor. I had a minor case of it and the doctor said there was not much to be done about it, but gave me medication to ease the irritation. He said it would clear itself up in a couple of weeks, which it did.

My point is that if a person with shingles goes to a faith healer there is a very good chance that it will clear up, (it would have cleared anyway). This gives the faith healer credit for something that would have happened naturally. On balance it gives the impression that the faith healer was successful. If the patient ends up seriously ill the faith healer's input tends to be forgotten.

cowboyBuilder

smacl wrote: »

But placebos do work in situations where stronger medical intervention isn't required and the patient basically needs rest and reassurance that they're on the mend. Similarly faith healers, homeopathy, prayer, ki massage, and various other kinds of mumbo jumbo. The relaxation response covers this quite well, and basically illustrates by my reading that placebos are basically a form of faith healing. As you say, they require belief / trust / faith. At the same time, their efficacy is limited to contexts for which they're appropriate, so I wouldn't be rushing out to buying shares in homeopathic contraceptives just yet. :pac:

Exactly, never underestimate the power of good bedside manner ...

seamus

looksee wrote: »

In fact shingles would be one of the better examples of a faith healer apparently being effective. It can't be cured, but medication can ease the pain, and it would normally clear up on its own, though it takes a while. Anti viral medication can stop it from getting any worse, but if a random joe went to a faith healer he would find his shingles cleared up, but it would have done anyway.

Known as "regression to the mean" - the longer any given curable illness has persisted, the closer the patient is to being "cured".

That is, if a 'flu takes on average 4 days to clear up, then someone who is on day 5, is likely to see it clear up very soon, someone on day 6, even sooner, day 7, sooner, etc.

Where this comes into play with placebos and quackery is that people are far more likely to seek out "alternative" treatment where medicine appears to have failed.

So if someone gets the 'flu, they know it'll clear up in a couple of days, take some drugs and go to bed. On day 5 they start getting worried it hasn't cleared up. On day 7 they're desperate so on a friend's recommendation they go speak to a quack.

The next day they feel a lot better and become a convert to the quackery, unaware that they would have felt better either way.

nozzferrahhtoo

the_pen_turner wrote: »

do you think there is any benefit of faith healers to an atheist

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I put all this down to the placebo affect but that only works if you believe it to be true

I have long been interested in studying Placebo and the effects of it. It is a remarkably interesting subject. And one interesting thing that came up from comparing the effects of placebo and actual treatments on people..... is that placebo often works EVEN WHEN the person receiving it knows it is a placebo.

And even more interesting is that placebo efficacy goes up with the invasiveness of the delivery.... also even when the recipient knows it is placebo. So a medicine is less effective than a pill. But a pill is less effective than an injection. And so forth.

So it is not always true that placebo only works when people are convinced it is true. So could a "faith healer" benefit an atheist? It is probably not very likely on average, but it certainly is not precluded by anything I have read.

smacl

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

So it is not always true that placebo only works when people are convinced it is true. So could a "faith healer" benefit an atheist? It is probably not very likely on average, but it certainly is not precluded by anything I have read.

It is also the case that what people think and state they believe and what they actually believe are not necessarily the same. For example, many an atheist will get just as scared as their Catholic counterpart when watching a movie such as The Exorcist, where in theory if they were true to their stated beliefs they shouldn't. Trained reflexive responses apply to more than just Pavlov's dog.

smacl

looksee wrote: »

You are misunderstanding me.

My bad, makes more sense re-reading your post.

nozzferrahhtoo

smacl wrote: »

many an atheist will get just as scared as their Catholic counterpart when watching a movie such as The Exorcist, where in theory if they were true to their stated beliefs they shouldn't.

I am not entirely sure that is true. Mainly because, even though I lack any theist beliefs..... I still have many of the human attributes that leave people prone to them.

Hyperactive agency detection. The Intentional Stance. A brain that seeks patterns and narratives. And mirror neurons which allow me to "feel" at some level the pain and fear and so forth of any on screen character. Empathy. Fear of the unknown.

And so on and so on.

So I think a well done horror film, even one heavily relying on theistic ideas, can still tap into much of the human condition that is entirely in common between atheists and theists.

And that is all before pointing out that an atheist does not have to parse a theistic horror film, such as the one you name, through theistic narratives. Much of the film taps into a family dealing with a child displaying mental instability of an extreme nature.

Aside from a scene or two such as the impossible 360 degree head rotation..... there is not much in the film that can not be parsed through the narrative of dealing with a mentally unstable protagonist and all the pain and horror and fear that comes with that.

But having said all of that, I would also point out the "suspension of disbelief" is a thing when watching films for many people. And some are better at it than others. And I envy them because most horror films, especially the one you exampled, leave me entirely unmoved to fear. With few exceptions. "Descent" being one great exception where the director really managed to capture the feeling and presence of claustrophobia. Very well done and even managed to move me to the edge of the seat and gripping the sides.

But I know people every bit as rational as I who have the enviable ability to drop into full on "suspension of disbelief" and become horrified or scared by a movie that would otherwise leave a bearer of a fully optimised Gallvonic Skin Response detector struggling to find a reaction in me.

So no I would not be moved to suspect people do not believe what they say they believe off the back of such an example. There are ways to explain such responses while leaving their purported belief system above suspicion.

wokingvoter

smacl wrote: »

The problem here with faith healers, homeopathy, etc... is that the person going to them might believe they've taken action to treat their problem, where they might actually need proper medical intervention. People can and do die from this. A good article here on this effect, one of many.

So to answer the OPs question, if he/she gets shingles, go see a doctor. It is a condition that is unpleasant enough, typically needs medical treatment, and can be dangerous to the elderly. Never go to the faith healer first, as you might delay proper necessary medical intervention with dire consequences.

Why did you leave out the rest of my post, where I pointed out just that?

smacl

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

And that is all before pointing out that an atheist does not have to parse a theistic horror film, such as the one you name, through theistic narratives. Much of the film taps into a family dealing with a child displaying mental instability of an extreme nature.

Aside from a scene or two such as the impossible 360 degree head rotation..... there is not much in the film that can not be parsed through the narrative of dealing with a mentally unstable protagonist and all the pain and horror and fear that comes with that.

Or a neighbour upstairs with a strong vacuum cleaner even

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3orYmKJzPk

Anecdotal, but I've come across many instances where people who consider themselves rational atheists continue to display irrational fears, possibly as a result religious indoctrination at an earlier age. People carry all sorts of phobias they realise are entirely irrational, but that doesn't lessen their effects.

Pherekydes

smacl wrote: »

Anecdotal, but I've come across many instances where people who consider themselves rational atheists continue to display irrational fears, possibly as a result religious indoctrination at an earlier age. People carry all sorts of phobias they realise are entirely irrational, but that doesn't lessen their effects.

I was running past Lucan cemetery one night, about dusk, and the whole place was deserted. There's a large skip just inside the main gate for the disposal of old flowers and such. There was a guy in the skip sorting recyclables and non-recyclables, but he was bent over and I didn't see or hear him until I was just abreast of the skip and then the fcuker stood up suddenly. Needless to say I jumped clean out of my running gear.

Night of the Zombies. :pac:

nozzferrahhtoo

smacl wrote: »

People carry all sorts of phobias they realise are entirely irrational, but that doesn't lessen their effects.

Hehehe indeed. And some people carry rational phobias and are accused of superstition for it. I, for example, avoid walking under ladders. A girl noticed this once and asked me "I thought you were uber rational and not prone to superstition".

So I just pointed out to her the rational reasons why walking under a ladder is pretty silly at the best of times, given their instability, the instability of anyone using them, and how prone people up them are to dropping things like pots of paint

But even the most irrational phobias can have a rational aspect too. Take Friday 13th for example. At it's base, any fear of that day is entirely irrational. It is a number. It is no different to any other number really.

But DUE to irrational phobia of it people act out of character on that day to protect themselves. Breaking routines, driving differently to how they would normally drive, and much more. Which results in Friday 13th in some ways actually being a more dangerous day than most.

So I find as I age I am slowly, year on year, developing a rather rational phobia based on the foundation of an entirely irrational one. How messed up is that??!?!?

Not to mention my phobia of the type of person who has a phobia over things like negative numbers, the number 13, and other such nonsense I wonder is there a name for that? The phobia of people dumb enough to have irrational phobias? Or the phobia of a world populated with such people?