THE EDITOR: The new head of the Inter-Religious Organisation (IRO) is calling for daily prayer in TT. This is a repeat of endless similar calls. We have had calls for prayer to deal with crime and every other problem under the sun.
Sadly, prayer has never worked and will continue to be a false solace to the weak-minded.
Here’s an argument that questions the efficacy of prayer:
The illusion of efficacy:
Examining prayer as false hope
1. Lack of empirical evidence
* Despite centuries of religious practice, there is no conclusive empirical evidence demonstrating that prayer consistently leads to tangible outcomes.
* Scientific studies on intercessory prayer (praying for others) have yielded mixed results, with some showing no significant impact on health outcomes.
* The absence of consistent evidence raises doubts about the effectiveness of prayer as a reliable solution.
2. Randomness and confirmation bias
* When people pray for specific outcomes (such as healing from illness) they often attribute positive results to prayer while ignoring negative outcomes.
* Confirmation bias leads individuals to remember instances where prayer seemed effective and forget those where it had no impact.
* Random events can be mistakenly attributed to prayer, reinforcing the illusion of efficacy.
3. Natural processes vs divine intervention
* Many positive outcomes attributed to prayer can be explained by natural processes, medical treatments, or statistical probabilities.
* For example, a person recovering from an illness may credit prayer, but it could be due to medical treatment, the body’s immune response, or chance.
* The boundary between divine intervention and natural causality remains blurred.
4. Selective memory and survivorship bias
* People tend to remember instances when prayer seemingly worked (eg, surviving a dangerous situation), but forget cases where it didn’t.
* Survivorship bias occurs when we focus on the survivors (those who prayed and had positive outcomes) and overlook those who prayed and didn’t experience the same results.
5. Psychological comfort and coping mechanism
* Prayer provides psychological comfort, reducing anxiety and stress.
* However, this comfort doesn’t necessarily translate into objective outcomes.
* The placebo effect may contribute to the perception of prayer’s efficacy.
6. Alternative explanations for positive outcomes
* Positive outcomes attributed to prayer might result from factors like hope, community support, or the placebo effect.
* These factors can exist independently of prayer and don’t necessarily validate its efficacy.
In summary, while prayer offers emotional solace and a sense of connection, its effectiveness in producing specific outcomes remains unproven. The power of prayer may be more about human psychology and social support than supernatural intervention.
MOHAN RAMCHARAN
Birmingham, England
The post The false hope of prayer appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.
