praying for a wee one

2001-10-02 Thread James Guinee
This post can't be any less relevant than the average penis size of men from India. Boy, who needs coffee in the morning with a story like that? Here is an interesting study. Based on its results, I wonder if the unwanted pregnancy rate could be reduced by invoking the power of prayer. Althou

praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Retta Poe
You know, if prayer has any effect on conception, you'd think it would work in reverse. It seems to me that I have known a whole lot of women who have prayed, with great fervency, "Please, God, let me not be pregnant!" but to no avail. Maybe a new study could be done to test whether praying

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-02 Thread Stephen Black
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, James Guinee wrote: > Here is an interesting study ["Prayer may influence in vitro > fertilization success"]. Based on its results, I wonder if the > unwanted pregnancy rate could be reduced by invoking the power > of prayer. Faith is surely a remarkable thing. It can contemp

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-02 Thread Paul Brandon
At 10:59 AM -0400 10/2/01, Stephen Black wrote: >On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, James Guinee wrote: > >> Here is an interesting study ["Prayer may influence in vitro >> fertilization success"]. Based on its results, I wonder if the >> unwanted pregnancy rate could be reduced by invoking the power >> of praye

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-02 Thread Jeff Ricker
Stephen Black wrote: > I think Jim should pray that the > experiment is in error. The full text of the original article is available at http://www.reproductivemedicine.com/Features/Feature.htm The very last line of the artcile states: "Our data suggest a benefit of IP [intercessory prayer] on

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-02 Thread Paul Brandon
>Stephen Black wrote: > >> I think Jim should pray that the >> experiment is in error. > >The full text of the original article is available at >http://www.reproductivemedicine.com/Features/Feature.htm > >The very last line of the artcile states: > >"Our data suggest a benefit of IP [intercessory

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Stephen Black
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Jeff Ricker wrote: (referring to a study which found that prayer improved the pregnancy rate after in-vitro fertization): > The full text of the original article is available at > http://www.reproductivemedicine.com/Features/Feature.htm and > I would appreciate very much see

RE: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Paul Smith
Stephen Black wrote: > If any simple and risk-free medical procedure was found to double > the pregnancy rate after IVF, as prayer is reported to do, it > would quickly find its way into every IVF clinic in the world, > and anyone who failed to use the procedure would be risking > malpractice. Ye

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Kenneth M. Steele
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Jeff Ricker wrote: > (referring to a study which found that prayer improved the > pregnancy rate after in-vitro fertization): > > > The full text of the original article is available at > > http://www.reproductivemedicine.com/Features/Feature.htm > > and > > > I would app

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Jeff Ricker
I asked for your impressions of the methods and statistical analyses of the prayer/in-vitro-fertilization study at http://www.reproductivemedicine.com/Features/Feature.htm In response, Stephen Black wrote: > After you strip away the bells and > whistles, it's actually a simple study, and the res

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Paul Brandon
>> On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Jeff Ricker wrote: >> (referring to a study which found that prayer improved the >> pregnancy rate after in-vitro fertization): >> >> > The full text of the original article is available at >> > http://www.reproductivemedicine.com/Features/Feature.htm >> >> and >> >> > I wou

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread jim clark
Hi I got into a lengthy debate about this study on another list. The suggestion that fraud might have been involved was deemed to be an ad hominum argument. In looking into the study, I found that at least some of the authors have been affiliated with Alternative Medicine in general (Kwang Yul

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Richard Pisacreta
At 10:59 AM -0400 10/2/01, Stephen Black wrote: > >Faith is surely a remarkable thing. It can contemplate a God who >is unmoved by the savagery that could destroy more than 5,000 >innocent lives, yet so responsive to human need as to boost the >in-vitro fertilization rate in response to a fe

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Mike Scoles
Richard Pisacreta wrote: > At 10:59 AM -0400 10/2/01, Stephen Black wrote: > > > > >Faith is surely a remarkable thing. It can contemplate a God > who > >is unmoved by the savagery that could destroy more than 5,000 > >innocent lives, yet so responsive to human need as to boost the > >in-vit

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Louis_Schmier
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Mike Scoles wrote: > > "But there is no view of human life, or of the condition of mankind, from > which, without the greatest violence, we can infer the moral attributes, or > learn that infinite benevolence, conjoined with infinite power and infinite > wisdom, which we must

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Mike Scoles
Louis_Schmier wrote: > I'm not sure what is it you choose not to believe. I am unclear about what > responsibiliity are you placing on yourself as a moral? I choose not to believe in something that requires suspending reason, especially if such a belief gives me comfort when I should not feel co

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Stephen Black
> I wrote, regarding that prayer-makes-pregnancies experiment: > > > I doubt that hardly any clinic anywhere is going > >to make use of this startling new finding. Why? > >Because no one will believe it. On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Jeff Ricker REPLIED: > > On this, I will have to respectfully disagree.

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Jeff Ricker
Stephen Black wrote: > My point was somewhat different. It was that if this were > a medical procedure, it would be immediately put into effect in > hospitals and clinics everywhere, given its demonstrated efficacy > and ease of implementation. But I doubt that women presenting for > IVF in the n

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread James Guinee
> Subject: Re: praying for a wee one > From: Stephen Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, James Guinee wrote: > > > Here is an interesting study ["Prayer may influence in vitro > > fertilization success"]. Based on its results, I wonder

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread James Guinee
On 3 Oct 2001, at 0:00, Teaching in the Psychological Sciences di wrote: > > >As the authors themselves are suggesting here, one should be very careful > >about making a firm conclusion regarding the value of prayer for improving > >the outcome of this procedure. > > Can you say "false positive

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Paul Brandon
>> Subject: Re: praying for a wee one >> From: Stephen Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, James Guinee wrote: >> >> > Here is an interesting study ["Prayer may influence in vitro >> > fertilization success"]. Ba

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Louis_Schmier
Mike, Hume give us no solace in the power of reason. much less science, either given the fallibility of us mortals. It seems to me, and I am not taking issue with you, that too often we make a decision first and then develop the consccious reasoning afterward. We often develop our conscious rea

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread jim clark
Hi On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, James Guinee wrote: > I just love the anti-religious bias that is so prevalent in > psychology! There are many things that scientific psychologists are against: sloppy designs, inappropriate statistics, faulty conclusions, careless reasoning, promoting theories that are fa

Re: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Mike Scoles
jim clark wrote: > Out of interest, is there a psychological literature on whether > people tend to become more convinced of god when they have their > mortality threatened? The following came from going back to 1967 on PsycInfo, using the search: threat AND (faith OR religiosity), then scanning

Re: RE: praying for a wee one

2001-10-03 Thread Kenneth M. Steele
On Wed, 03 Oct 2001 08:02:08 -0500 Paul Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stephen Black wrote: > > If any simple and risk-free medical procedure was found to double > > the pregnancy rate after IVF, as prayer is reported to do, it > > would quickly find its way into every IVF clinic in the wo

seduced by science (was praying for a wee one)

2001-10-04 Thread James Guinee
> >> > Here is an interesting study ["Prayer may influence in vitro > >> > fertilization success"]. Based on its results, I wonder if the > >> > unwanted pregnancy rate could be reduced by invoking the power > >> > of prayer. > >> > >> Faith is surely a remarkable thing. It can contemplate a God w

Re: seduced by science (was praying for a wee one)

2001-10-04 Thread jim clark
Hi On Thu, 4 Oct 2001, James Guinee wrote: > Just as science cannot teach much about morality, religion cannot teach > much about science. It doesn't mean they can't have some partnership, but > not much of one. The complication for those of us who teach and do science about human beings is

Re: seduced by science (while praying for a wee one)

2001-10-04 Thread Paul Brandon
>As you can imagine, I've grown a little weary of the anti-religious sentiment >that *seems* so prevalent in psychology. I don't mean to be rude, and I >certainly believe others have the right to profess or not profess whatever >they >want about God and religion. Are you sure that your reaction

RE: seduced by science (was praying for a wee one)

2001-10-04 Thread Rick Adams
Jim wrote: > Another point I hadn't really considered is that people in > the church will begin to believe that they need to test all > religious teachings and empirically, and when they learn this > cannot be done, they will likely become disillusioned and go > away. Now he is not say

RE: seduced by science (was praying for a wee one)

2001-10-06 Thread Richard Pisacreta
i.e., most >would agree that scientific evidence for evolution is more than adequate >to dispute the literal creationism of Genesis The theories of evolution and Genesis are not necessarily incompatible.Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com --- You are currently subscr

Re: seduced by science (while praying for a wee one)

2001-10-06 Thread Richard Pisacreta
I saw a movie a long ago with Max VonSidow (sic). He turns on his tv once a year to see if anything has changed. He says (one of my favorite movie lines), "If Jesus Christ came back and saw all the things being said or done in his name, He would never stop puking." That, for me, is an excellent su

RE: seduced by science (while praying for a wee one)

2001-10-06 Thread Paul Smith
enjoy watching and talking about the movie...).   Paul Smith Alverno College Milwaukee -Original Message-  From: Richard Pisacreta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2001 4:22 PMTo: Teaching in the Psychological SciencesSubject: Re: seduced by science (while

RE: seduced by science (was praying for a wee one)

2001-10-07 Thread Paul Brandon
> > >i.e., most >>would agree that scientific evidence for evolution is more than adequate >>to dispute the literal creationism of Genesis > > > >The theories of evolution and Genesis are not necessarily incompatible. Evolution is a fact; natural selection is a theory that accounts for it. Genesi

RE: seduced by science (was praying for a wee one)

2001-10-08 Thread Richard Pisacreta
> > >i.e., most > >>would agree that scientific evidence for evolution is more than adequate > >>to dispute the literal creationism of Genesis > > > > > > > >The theories of evolution and Genesis are not necessarily incompatible. > >Evolution is a fact; natural selection is a theory that accoun

RE: seduced by science (was praying for a wee one)

2001-10-08 Thread jim clark
Hi On Mon, 8 Oct 2001, Richard Pisacreta wrote: > I also believe that evolution is a fact. Species are not > static. Anyone who breeds animals knows that. Last time I > looked, the literature still refers to it as "Darwin's > theories of evolution", as did the recent PBS series. Few > dispute evo