Q&A: Scientific Experiments and Prayer
Scientific Experiments and Prayer
Question
Hello and blessings, Rabbi,
I read part of your article on prayer and scientific experiments, and I have a number of questions…
I saw there in the article the example of the ravens, used to illustrate the principle that there is an asymmetry in the research here, since when the experiment fails it proves nothing, but when the experiment works it confirms the effect of prayer…
1. I do not understand why there is no theological conclusion here…
After all, it is not as though we are checking people one by one and seeing whether their prayer was answered…
Rather, we are testing in an experiment with a large number of people, so that once we find an experiment in which there is no difference between the experimental group and the control group, that seemingly shows that the prayer of all the people in that experiment had no effect…
2. I do not understand why a positive result is confirming…
After all, even if you argue that in a case where prayer has no effect, then apparently in this specific experiment people participated whose prayers God did not accept, the skeptic can likewise come and argue that the positive result in favor of those for whom people prayed is completely random, and perhaps in another instance the result would be the opposite…
3. I saw the study by Sheinfeld that the Rabbi presents there, where there is an entirely positive result for prayers. I would like to ask the Rabbi what the overall research picture on this topic is, because I saw on Wikipedia a picture being presented that prayers are not effective. Since I am not familiar with research sites and do not speak English, I would be glad to know what the overall picture is…
Please, if possible, give an answer that properly covers the topic. Personally, I feel that ever since I was exposed to this issue I have not been able to pray with proper intention, because the matter is disturbing my peace of mind.
Thank you
Answer
I didn’t understand which article you mean. Why did you read only part of it?
Discussion on Answer
1-2. The assumption is that statistical significance is a good indication. With significant results there is no room for excuses about randomness. But there could be divine involvement that tilts the statistics. However, such involvement can only be in one direction.
Failure can be intentional (from God—for example, if He wants to remain hidden, or to punish someone who is conducting experiments on Him), but success, even if it is intentional, itself proves His involvement.
3. I am not familiar with the overall picture. I brought that article only to show the biases of researchers in those fields. If you ask me, in my opinion there is no divine involvement in the world, and requests to Him are usually not answered (I cannot say never). I have written a lot about this here on the site and in the second volume of my trilogy. There I also dealt with the implications for prayer and intention.
Of course there is also a middle approach.
First approach: God answers and responds to all requests in one way or another (heaven forbid—sometimes I ask for nonsense, and who says that even a request that seems good to me really is?)
Second approach: God does not respond and does not answer in most cases.
Third approach: prayer has no direct connection to this world, at least in this era. It operates in higher worlds and comes to repair the possibility of a direct and proper connection between man and God. The direct connection that existed in the First Temple proved itself morally bad and wicked in terms of the commandments.
That is hard for people to accept, either because how can you prove it, or because they are busy with themselves and want God to do what they want, instead of simply praying as a commandment / acknowledgment.
Your article in the book God Plays Dice about prayer and scientific experiments.