[Avodah] effects of relgious worship on health

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 11:26:44AM -0600, Steven J Scher wrote:
: This is the big problem I have with this type of study.

: What we are saying is that HaShem, simply to convince people of His 
: existence, would treat one randomly chosen group of people substantially 
: better than another randomly chosen group of people.  This doesn't sound to 
: me like the God who was willing to spare a whole city of reshaim if 10 
: tzaddikim could be found.

That's how the study is being used. In reality, all the study is really
saying is that people who take quiet time out each week to pray, or in
the case of Buddhists to meditate -- without even necessarily involving
any notion of deity! -- are more likely to live longer.

Given the effects of stress, that is explainable without any religious
implication. Bitachon reduces stress by giving meaning and purpose to
daily irritants, and thus high blood pressure, stomach acid, and other
stress-related symptoms.

If the study were about the people prayed for rather than the people
praying, and one can show that the recipient's health didn't correlate to
their own religiosity, then it would be easier to tie to religious import.


The discussion on Areivim also drifted into the notion of proving G-d,
and rishonim who made such an excercise an essential part of Avodas H'.
The Rambam, as a famous example, didn't believe that knowing G-d simply
because one believes one's parents and rebbeim was a fulfillment of
yedi'as Hashem without such a proof.

As RYGrossman wrote on Areivim:
> The Pis'he Lev's introduction to Sha'ar Ha'Yihud of the Hovos
> Ha'Levovos summarizes the basic classic opinions requiring or
> encouraging rational demonstration of God's existence.  [The bulk of
> that introduction is actually aimed at showing that we ought *not* to
> engage in this sort of philosophical speculation, but he still does
> provide a good summary of many of the opinions that do encourage it.]

The Lev Tov doesn't touch Sha'ar haYichud, and instead just has an
intro explaining why.

When RSJScher asked:
> I find it very hard to imagine studies that COULD offer proof of HaShem's
> existence.  What would such evidence look like?

Rn TK replied:
> There is a difference between "proof" and "evidence."  There is a HUGE
> amount of circumstantial evidence for Hashem's existence but no actual
> proof.  The evidence falls into two broad categories:
 
> A. Evidence from history, science, from the Torah, and from daily events
> ("coincidences," "amazing cures," "unbelievable rescues" etc) that there
> is Somebody Up There pulling the strings.

> B. Evidence /against/ the thesis that everything happens by chance,
> that everything is random.

> Atheists also have some evidence on their side, evidence for randomness
> and evidence against Divine Providence, so you end up weighing the
> evidence on both sides. To me the evidence on our side is overwhelmingly
> superior to the evidence on the other side, but obviously atheists look at
> the same scales and weigh the two sides differently. I should amend that:
> actually most atheists have not seriously considered the evidence against
> their side but mostly dismiss it without giving it very deep thought.
> This even includes clever, facile atheists who have written whole books
> on the subject -- men like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.
> Their learning is shallow and superficial.

> BTW I have not even laid out a table of contents here for a Proof of G-d's
> existence, so don't bother trying to argue that I haven't "made my case."
> I have only said there is a case, a strong one. I would add that if G-d
> hid Himself so completely that there was NO evidence for His existence,
> or overwhelming evidence for His non-existence, He would not be playing
> fair with His creatures, and one of the postulates about G-d is that He
> is just. To assume a G-d who exists but who is unjust is tantamount to
> assuming no G-d at all. Equally, to assume a G-d who does not want to
> be found and who does not want us to have a relationship with Him is
> also tantamount to assuming no G-d. He has definitely left clues all
> over the place.

To repeat my own aphorism:
    The brain is a wonderful organ
    for justifying conclusions
    the heart already reached.

And therefore bright people aren't more likely to arrive at truth on
religious questions. Instead, they are more likely to buttress the answer
their negi'os lead them to.

Few philosophers today believe it's possible to prove G-d's existence.
Or disprove it. But evidence....

To put it another way... A proof is a bunch of reasoning built atop
postulates. Where do the postulates come from? In general, by extrpolating
from experience or sources deemed reliable. Can such a structure ever be
stronger than belief based directly on the experience itself?

Yet another way, as R' Shalom Carmy once posted here:
> People who throw around big words on these subjects always seem to take
> for granted things that I don't.

> The people who keep insisting that it's necessary to prove things about
> G-d, including His existence, seem to take it for granted that devising
> these proofs is identical with knowing G-d.

> Now if I know a human being personally the last thing I'd do, except as
> a purely intellectual exercise, is prove his or her existence.




This topic was discussed at length on Hirhurim (back when it was entirely
RGS's blog) and I discuss it too on Aspaqlaria.

My own feeling is that the typical kiruv worker both knows and doesn't
know the value of experience over proof. OT1H, the typical program is
built around the experience of Shabbos. OTOH, when asked to prove Yahadus,
they fall back to the misnamed "Kuzari Proof". (I say "misnamed" because
Rihal's point was mesorah was more solid than philosophy; not to create
a new philosophical proof based on mesorah!)

In RnTK's terms, experiencing a Shabbos with all the oddities of hilkhos
boreir is more evidence than all the arguments about ma'aseh Bereishis,
the Mabul, Migdal Bavel, or whether other cultures had a concept of a
7 day week.

By this standard, the tough question isn't why China has a record of an
individual culture before the Mabul and Migdal Bavel (which can be
addressed and has been discussed here ad infinitum), but explaining
mechias Amaleiq.

Some links to the archive:
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=B#BELIEF%20OR%20PROOF
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/getindex.cgi?section=K#KNOWLEDGE%20AND%20PROOF

Hirhurim:
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2005/11/proof-of-gods-existence.html
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2007/04/proofs-of-god.html
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2007/05/proofs-of-god-ii.html
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2005/03/defense-of-simple-faith.html
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2005/05/defense-of-simple-faith-ii.html
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2005/06/defense-of-simple-faith-iii.html
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2006/11/problem-with-proofs-of-god.html
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2008/10/proofs-for-god-justification.html
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2008/08/r-soloveitchiks-proof-of-god.html
http://hirhurim.blogspot.com/2008/08/rav-kook-and-proofs-of-god.html

Aspaqlaria (Category: Faith and Proof):
http://www.aishdas.org/asp/category/machashavah/faith-and-proof


Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Despair is the worst of ailments. No worries
micha at aishdas.org        are justified except: "Why am I so worried?"
http://www.aishdas.org                         - Rav Yisrael Salanter
Fax: (270) 514-1507