Can we have the Placebo Effect without falsehood?

Great Debates
61

[QUOTE=Staggerlee]
I was only quoting back to you some anti-scientific material from the same site. It seems odd that you should reject scientific method on one hand, while insisting there is good scientific evidence on the other. I have tried following up those experiments cited in your link, but so far have only turned up other NDE worship sites promoting them in a similar way. I’ll keep looking.

Of course cells are pretty darn small, so you can hold a great number in a handful. According to this educational site , there are somewhere in the region of 100 billion cells in the human brain. Obviously the human brain didn’t arise magically from nothing - nervous systems have taken millions of years to get to this pinnacle of complexity. If you consider the human brain to be simply a well-developed receiver for the spirit to manifest itself in, what would say the relatively simple nervous systems of the invertebrates which comprise 80%(ish) of animal life are for?
[/QUOTE]

The same thing. People will believe what they hear some believed “authority” say over their own observation, why I don’t know. Having been out of body it all fits into place. I doubt any skeptical scientist can be shown enough evidence to change his mind. It will take a real experience.

Now, I don’t reject science any more than I reject religion. Both belief systems are filled with dogma and doctrine that has nothing to do with the search for truth or the search for God. It is this I object to. I read a story today that illustrates some of what I am saying. Scientists rigged up a virtual device so someone looking into it, through a set of mirrors and cameras can see themselves as if they were out of body. Then they announce they have triggered an out of body experience. This is done literally with mirrors, they are spreading misinformation to the general public in the name of science. This is unconscionable behaviour. But it does show how desperate “science” is becoming to explain away the spiritual nature of man. Their “experiment” has absolutely nothing to do with real out of body experiences.

62

A Placebo can be a hug, or a pat on the back. It can be a prayer, or a pill. It can be faith in God or belief in a ritual. A placebo is a belief, a belief that the item or action presented will cure or improve an illness or condition. It works on belief. How well it works depends on the intensity of the belief. The more intense, the better it works.

A belief can literally kill you, that is how powerful belief can be.

Anorexia Nervosa is not a disease, nor a mental illness, it is a belief. A very powerful belief that can kill those who own it. The belief that no matter how thin one becomes it is not thin enough. The idea that thinness is all that matters.

Voo Doo can also kill people, or should I say Woo Doo if they believe in it strong enough.

Depression, anxiety, and many other common ailments are also the result of beliefs in one way or another.

So our beliefs and thoughts are very powerful things, they do count, and if we really understood this cures would be much easier to get, with the cooperation of the patient. Why are we not using this information more to help others. I have personally seen cures comes about from changed belief systems in almost everything including terminal cancer. When will we understand?

63

Another article on the “out of body” experiments, which are interesting and deserve their own thread.

They are not, as Lekatt claimes, experiments trying to debunk out of body experiences, although Dr. Henrik Ehrsson, the neuroscientist that headed the experiments, stated that the results were “adding weight to the notion that errors in the brain’s processing of sensory information causes out-of-body experiences”. “Adding weight” is not "proving’. Journalists are, of course, each selling the story in their own way.

The scientists are interested in how a sense of where we are is generated by the brain. Usually, this gives us a sense that we are in our bodies. Some of the articles speculated about creating remote, virtual bodies for things like remote surgery. Personally, I think that we extend our sense of self already in many ways. When you learn to ride a bicycle, or get used to the feel of a new car, you’re (IMO) extending your sense of self. We do it with all of our tools, from paint brushes to backhoes, and considering expertise in tool use as an extension of a sense of self is interesting. Speculating about ways to use an extended or displaced sense of self is interesting.

I’d really like to see a scientific report on this, rather than pop articles.

Another article, though.

64

[QUOTE=Yllaria]
Another article on the “out of body” experiments, which are interesting and deserve their own thread.

They are not, as Lekatt claimes, experiments trying to debunk out of body experiences, although Dr. Henrik Ehrsson, the neuroscientist that headed the experiments, stated that the results were “adding weight to the notion that errors in the brain’s processing of sensory information causes out-of-body experiences”. “Adding weight” is not "proving’. Journalists are, of course, each selling the story in their own way.

The scientists are interested in how a sense of where we are is generated by the brain. Usually, this gives us a sense that we are in our bodies. Some of the articles speculated about creating remote, virtual bodies for things like remote surgery. Personally, I think that we extend our sense of self already in many ways. When you learn to ride a bicycle, or get used to the feel of a new car, you’re (IMO) extending your sense of self. We do it with all of our tools, from paint brushes to backhoes, and considering expertise in tool use as an extension of a sense of self is interesting. Speculating about ways to use an extended or displaced sense of self is interesting.

I’d really like to see a scientific report on this, rather than pop articles.

Another article, though.
[/QUOTE]

Of course they are, why would a neuroscientist be working with virtual reality computer models, if not to prove the brain creates us.

A famous Oklahoman Will Rogers said “you can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you can’t fool all the people all the time.”

Just another way of saying “truth will out.” If his intentions were honorable time will remember them, if not he will be forgotten next week.

65

Umm, as to paragraph two, pretty sure that was Lincoln. Indeed, almost positive.

66

[QUOTE=PBear42]
Umm, as to paragraph two, pretty sure that was Lincoln. Indeed, almost positive.
[/QUOTE]

You are correct, I looked it up also. I know it is also attributed to Rogers, but then I like Lincoln better. One of my favorite people.

67

At a guess, Rogers was quoting Lincoln. Probably with attribution.