Dear PaliGap, Welcome to FFL Live the breeding ground for Turq's turf
wars. Trying to have a healthy discussion with the Trickster Turqster is
like a dog chewing a bone for nutrition..:-)
But seriously he's a wounded warrior, roaming around with band-aids,
afraid of the intricate surgery he so desperately needs. Please read
about my articles on Small Penis disorder, my research article -
"Seekers, Gurus, SPC and the Rise of skeptic Gurus" - so as his
therapist I beg for your compassion and love. Let the "woowoo" effects
of all of us have placebo effect in treating his disorder.
Much Love - Ravi Yogi.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" <compost1uk@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> -- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "TurquoiseB" turquoiseb@ wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "PaliGap" <compost1uk@> wrote:
> > >
> [snip]
> > > For example - prayers for someone who does not know
> > > the prayers are being made, or yagyas performed, or
> > > whatever.
> >
> > I consider these possible, but as unlikely as
> > being struck by lightning. Twice.
> >
> > > Personally I don't share your certainty. (That does not
> > > mean I "believe" either. I'm open-minded).
> >
> > I also said nothing whatsoever about "certainty,"
> > and in fact went out of my way to indicate that
> > I *wasn't* certain. Sounds to me as if you're
> > making shit up to have something to argue
> > against.
>
> It's all words. No big deal. I just feel if someone
> says something is "as unlikely as being struck by
> lightning. Twice", then they're expressing a lot of
> confidence in what they believe. "Certainty" seems to
> be a reasonable word for that. No need to get irritable,
> I can take it back!
>
> I thought you were saying something interesting. i.e.
> All of this woo-woo stuff is "placebo". If you're saying
> "most of it is, but some may not be", or "I think it is
> but then again I have no idea", that's far more nuanced
> (and uninteresting?)
>
> "Placebo" is fascinating IMO. It is readily used to
> explain away troubling results. As in "it is *just*
> the placebo effect". But it seems to me that it must
> exclude effects that happen without the knowledge of
> the patient.
>
> But as far as their is any evidence for woo-woo cures,
> what evidence that there is will sometimes rule out
> that key pre-condition for placebo.
>
> For example... All "woo-woo" performed on animals.
>
> A friend of ours down the road has a bit of a reputation
> as a "healer". Her neighbour is the most non "new age"
> character you could possibly EVER imagine. But he is
> convinced she has helped him, and sees her regularly for
> woo-woo sessions. "Placebo"? Maybe. On the other hand she
> also does "healing for pets" and effortlessly obtains
> loyal followers when she attempts this - our household
> included, as it appears she has done something to improve
> the health of our cat. ;-) Personally I don't know what
> to make of it (I never do!), but I see some correlation
> at least.
>
> On the other hand, perhaps *I'm just trying to start
> an argument*!
>
> The verb "to FFL":
>
> I make interesting posts
> YOU are just trying to start an argument
> HE is just responding to having his buttons pushed
> SHE is stalking me
> THEY are going to have their posts ignored if they
> don't LISTEN UP!
>
