Do Healers Believe?

[Cyphermage]

My emphasis...and that is where you are wrong. They may have made their decision based on deliberately false information and you appear to have to no problem with that. I do.

The test of that is to go and yell...

There is no God!!
There is no Faith Healing!!

And see how many of them turn around and leave when presented with this new information which you claim they didn't have when deciding to attend.

If correcting the false information doesn't cause them to change their decision, and leave, then you don't get to claim the false information was the basis for their attending.

 

[Cyphermage]

Not answering the question, ...

Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, people who believe Pat Robertson gets messages directly from God telling him about unverifiable healings in vaguely described locations are idiots.

An unkind word, I know, but one has to draw the line somewhere in terms of consumer awareness.

 

[Cyphermage]

Just as a side-point, you seem to have misunderstood what memes are. If you believe in what Dawkins, Dennett and so forth have had to say about this, surely you'd have to view memes as selfish - the memes that persist will be those that reproduce effectively, regardless of what they do to individual humans. This means that memes such as a belief in the virtue of female genital mutilation can and do persist. Is challenging such common memes and profound myths mean?

It's feasible that our brains are 'hard-wired' to acquire certain beliefs - you call these beliefs profound...I could think of other short anglo-saxon words to describe them It's quite feasible that our brains are 'hard-wired' for a range of undesirable behaviours; however, we might actually attain fulfillment through overcoming such 'hard-wiring' in order to find better ways to behave. I wouldn't call this mean - words like 'progress', achievement' or 'enlightenment' spring to mind instead...

Well, the notion of selfish memes is that they reproduce effectively, which means that the community of individuals survives, perhaps at the expense of self-sacrifice of particular individuals that carry them.

A honeybee will commit suicide by stinging you, because it is genetically identical to all the other worker bees produced by the same queen. So it can extinguish its individual existence for the good of the community that carries identical genes.

By "profound" myths, I mean those which illustrate a moral or spiritual truth, and encourage people to exhibit traits which the community as a whole thinks of as valuable, even at some sacrifice to themselves.

Clearly, this can have a downside. What is a profound myth to a culture that values female genital mutilation above all else? Probably some touching story about a person who gave their life to ensure no clitoris escaped pruning. Or a girl who killed herself rather than spend life with her tingley bump still attached.

Nonetheless, I think most myths people look up to are either encouraging of good behavior, or harmless delusions. It's all stuff like "God loves you," "Feed the poor," "You will be rewarded in the afterlife."

"God can heal you" is probably one of the more harmless delusions, on a per capita basis. At least compared to things like "All infidels must die."

 

[SezMe]

The test of that is to go and yell...

There is no God!!
There is no Faith Healing!!

And see how many of them turn around and leave when presented with this new information which you claim they didn't have when deciding to attend.

If correcting the false information doesn't cause them to change their decision, and leave, then you don't get to claim the false information was the basis for their attending.

OK, I'll try to get my point through your thick skull one more time: It is NOT about the people and their religion. So stop bringing up this misdirection time after time.

The issue is the fraud commited by the sham preachers, not the believers who buy his schtick.

 

[Cyphermage]

OK, I'll try to get my point through your thick skull one more time: It is NOT about the people and their religion. So stop bringing up this misdirection time after time.

The issue is the fraud commited by the sham preachers, not the believers who buy his schtick.

You stated that the people attending made the decision to do so based on false information. I suggested a simple test you could easily perform to try and confirm your hypothesis.

If the people are not attending based on false information, then the preachers are not committing fraud, and as we have previously discussed, claims about what God can and cannot do in a religious context don't fall under the fraud statutes anyway.

 

[Yahzi]

No, I have just gone on record as saying "Fraud is fraud."

I asked you a simple question: do you think fraud is wrong?

Your response was... "Fraud is fraud."

The evidence is in this thread, for anyone to examine for themselves.

You will be taken much more seriously if you...

While I appreciate your advice, I must shamefully confess that I cannot return the favor. I can think of no way to end the above sentence that would make it true for you.

If you require these things in order to discuss, you will have limited success.

So my requirement that you discuss in good faith is too much? You feel the need to reserve the right to be dishonest?

Do you actually think there is anyone here who wishes to discuss anything under those conditions?

What part of this doesn't strike you as Constitutionally protected private religious practice by consenting adults?

What part of telling people they are being defrauded strikes you as not Constiutionally protected free speech?

It's not just that you want the hucksters to be free to huck... you want to silence the people who are anti-hucking.

You see, my argument is that the vast majority of these people are attending the event because they have made a perfectly informed and free choice to do so.

This is a factual claim. As such, it can be examined. If you choose to do so, you can rather quickly establish for yourself that it is patently false.

The entire point of this thread is that their information is misleading, distorted, and false.

If the people are not attending based on false information, then the preachers are not committing fraud

The people in the pews are attending based on false information. The preacher knows this, and carefully does not tell them. This makes him a fraud.

"God can heal you" is probably one of the more harmless delusions, on a per capita basis.

Sure it is. Because it's not you being harmed by the delusion.

Your recent posts have done nothing to dispel the conclusion that the basis of your argument is that you don't give a damn about how much other people suffer, as long as it's amusing to you.

 

[Yahzi]

The test of that is to go and yell...

There is no God!!
There is no Faith Healing!!

We are.

And you are bitching at us for doing so.

Would you care to resolve this contradiction?

No, I didn't think so.

 

[SezMe]

You stated that the people attending made the decision to do so based on false information. I suggested a simple test you could easily perform to try and confirm your hypothesis.

Your test does not address the issue at hand. Here is a better one: The preacher produces a FULL-disclosure regarding his (not god's) ability to perform the cures he touts. This includes evidence.

Now, with this evidence in hand, we can see how many people still come to his services.

 

[jon]

Well, the notion of selfish memes is that they reproduce effectively, which means that the community of individuals survives, perhaps at the expense of self-sacrifice of particular individuals that carry them.

A honeybee will commit suicide by stinging you, because it is genetically identical to all the other worker bees produced by the same queen. So it can extinguish its individual existence for the good of the community that carries identical genes.

Again, you seem to be misunderstanding what a selfish meme would be. The memes that persist will be thosethat survive and reproduce most effectively - this might involve strengthening a community, or the memes might for example be parasitic and do nothing but damage to the community(s) in which they reproduce. For example, look at all the bogus health scares that replicate so effectively - they generally do no good to anyone (except maybe those who profit by selling 'cures'), but can still be very successful memes

"God can heal you" is probably one of the more harmless delusions, on a per capita basis. At least compared to things like "All infidels must die."

The cruder theories of memes often view memes as overly independent/isolated, and thus fail to explain the interrellations between different ideas/different memes. 'God can heal you' may, in some but not all situations, be a fairly harmless delusion if you view it as a wholly isolated meme; however, it is often linked in to a range of other delusions (many harmful, some beneficial). In terms of 'faith healing' this meme is often linked to the belief that certain people have special powers or special links to God, that you should give them money, that you should support their political goals (which are often extremely dangerous delusions), that illnesses such as cancer can be healed without medical intervention etc...

 

[Beth]

That's a bad example, because I don't know a single smoker who isn't already aware of the damage it does, and wants to quit.

While I don't know anyone who isn't aware of the potential damage, I also don't know any smoker who is actively trying to quit. The ones I'm acquainted with tell me that they enjoy smoking and it's worth the price to them.

Similarly, I think most people who attend faith healer shows are aware of what they are doing and are willing to pay the price. While I may not agree with their choice to do so, I don't see any more reason to object to what they are doing (or the people who are selling it to them) than those who make, sell or buy cigarettes.

 

[Cyphermage]

Again, you seem to be misunderstanding what a selfish meme would be. The memes that persist will be thosethat survive and reproduce most effectively - this might involve strengthening a community, or the memes might for example be parasitic and do nothing but damage to the community(s) in which they reproduce. For example, look at all the bogus health scares that replicate so effectively - they generally do no good to anyone (except maybe those who profit by selling 'cures'), but can still be very successful memes

I didn't say "strengthen." I said "survive." A meme that kills its host before it can be communicated doesn't persist.

 

[Cyphermage]

I asked you a simple question: do you think fraud is wrong?

Your response was... "Fraud is fraud."

The evidence is in this thread, for anyone to examine for themselves.

I have stated numerous times that "right" and "wrong" are value judgments. "Fraud is Fraud" doesn't associate either right or wrong with fraud. It just indicates an unwillingness on my part to play the litmus test game with you.

What part of telling people they are being defrauded strikes you as not Constiutionally protected free speech?

It's not just that you want the hucksters to be free to huck... you want to silence the people who are anti-hucking.

I have no objection to you SAYING anything you wish about faith healing. However, you continue to talk about "removing" the frauds and flim-flam artists, which has more dire implications.

The people in the pews are attending based on false information. The preacher knows this, and carefully does not tell them. This makes him a fraud.

Religious "information", being metaphor and allegory-based, as opposed to fact-based, doesn't fall into the category of fraud for not being factual. Would you force every priest to prove Jesus walked on water before opening the doors of his church? Claims that God can do something no more constitute fraud than claims the Easter Bunny can do something constitute fraud.

Your recent posts have done nothing to dispel the conclusion that the basis of your argument is that you don't give a damn about how much other people suffer, as long as it's amusing to you.

As I said, right wing debating tactics. Make the topic about the poster instead of the subject being discussed, and when all else fails, start talking about children being molested.

 

[Cyphermage]

We are.

And you are bitching at us for doing so.

Would you care to resolve this contradiction?

No, I didn't think so.

No, I have encouraged you to yell "faith healing doesn't work" as loudly as you can to the sick people entering the auditorium.

I've just maintained that.

1. Few of them will care.

2. Finding some pretense to put the faith healer out of business, as opposed to just engaging in consumer education, interferes with the freely chosen religious choice of his clients.

 

[jon]

I didn't say "strengthen." I said "survive." A meme that kills its host before it can be communicated doesn't persist.

A meme that destroys *all* its hosts prior to their spreading it will not survive. A meme that kills its host after it is communicated can survive, though, as can one which destroys most but not all of its hosts. For a meme to kill its host in certain ways - for example, for people to commit suicide in a particularly spectacular way or to refuse medical treatment for serious illness while loudly proclaiming their faith in God - may actually be a very effective way for memes to be reproduced. Bit of a shame for the hosts, though...

 

[blutoski]

While I don't know anyone who isn't aware of the potential damage, I also don't know any smoker who is actively trying to quit. The ones I'm acquainted with tell me that they enjoy smoking and it's worth the price to them.

Similarly, I think most people who attend faith healer shows are aware of what they are doing and are willing to pay the price. While I may not agree with their choice to do so, I don't see any more reason to object to what they are doing (or the people who are selling it to them) than those who make, sell or buy cigarettes.

I'm not sure this is true. The faith healers operate by deploying agents into the audience to collect private information. They then claim to be receiving this information from God, while they are in fact reproducing it from compiled surviellance intelligence. Audience members are persuaded that the healers claims about God are true, because his claims about his own abilities (to be in direct contact with God) appear to be confirmed. It's a confidence scam.

The participants' faith in God is not what draws them: it's the confidence in the healer's confirmable, produceable, claims about himself that are persuasive. Since these claims are based on lies, the crime being committed is fraud. It doesn't matter whether this is in a religious context, pretending to get information from God, or in a commercial context, pretending he just got off a call with a doctor, and telling the patient he needs medical treatment when it's not true. A lie is a lie, and lying for cash is fraud.

 

[Cyphermage]

I'm not sure this is true. The faith healers operate by deploying agents into the audience to collect private information. They then claim to be receiving this information from God, while they are in fact reproducing it from compiled surviellance intelligence. Audience members are persuaded that the healers claims about God are true, because his claims about his own abilities (to be in direct contact with God) appear to be confirmed. It's a confidence scam.

Some faith healers have been caught using this scam. Are you suggesting that ALL faith healers do this?

 

[blutoski]

Some faith healers have been caught using this scam. Are you suggesting that ALL faith healers do this?

Nope. My argument is that the ones who do should be charged.

 

[Cyphermage]

Nope. My argument is that the ones who do should be charged.

I think they should be. I never understood why Peter Popoff was never charged with anything when Randi caught him using a radio receiver disguised as a hearing aid to receive the information on cards people had filled out.

 

[blutoski]

I think they should be. I never understood why Peter Popoff was never charged with anything when Randi caught him using a radio receiver disguised as a hearing aid to receive the information on cards people had filled out.

The further value is that the ones who get charged will set an example. Others will think twice before trying to reproduce the stunt.

 

[Beth]

I'm not sure this is true. The faith healers operate by deploying agents into the audience to collect private information. They then claim to be receiving this information from God, while they are in fact reproducing it from compiled surviellance intelligence. Audience members are persuaded that the healers claims about God are true, because his claims about his own abilities (to be in direct contact with God) appear to be confirmed. It's a confidence scam.

Regarding those that do this: Yes, you're correct.