People Still Rely on Divine Intervention, Not Medicine & Science
Even 20% of doctors, nurses, and other medical workers believe this! I'm not sure I want to be treated by someone who thinks that even if they screw up, God can still come along and fix their mistakes for them. As if all that weren't strange enough, many of those who expect a miracle also think that they should be able to demand that treatment continue against doctor recommendations. If you are looking for a miracle, then what's the point of further treatment? A real miracle would be able to take place regardless of the conditions, wouldn't it?
Dr. Lenworth Jacobs, a University of Connecticut surgery professor and trauma chief at Hartford Hospital, was the lead author. He said trauma treatment advances have allowed patients who previously would have died at the scene to survive longer. That shift means hospital trauma specialists "are much more heavily engaged in the death process," he said.
Jacobs said he frequently meets people who think God will save their dying loved one and who want medical procedures to continue.
"You can't say, 'That's nonsense.' You have to respect that" and try to show them X-rays, CAT scans and other medical evidence indicating death is imminent, he said.
Relatives need to know that "it's not that you don't want a miracle to happen, it's just that is not going to happen today with this patient," he said. Families occasionally persist, and hospitals have gone to court seeking to stop medical treatment doctors believe is futile, but such cases are quite rare.
Source: CNN
Simply telling people that it's nonsense to expect a miracle isn't the same as respecting their belief that there will be a miracle. If you know that a belief is nonsense, you shouldn't respect it and it's nonsense to say that anyone else should. At the same time, though, you don't necessarily have to tell people that their belief is nonsense. This would be one time when it's best to just keep quiet about that bit and find ways to help them come to terms with reality. Yes, they are in denial about reality and, yes, that's completely understandable. They aren't even grasping at straws because "miracle" isn't a straw that's there to grasp at — it's a fiction that helps people cope, but it's not one that should allowed to last too long.
Medicine is a bit like architectural engineering in that it's a field where cold, brutal reality dominates and there's no room for wishful thinking. Some building designs just won't stand and no amount of wishing, hoping, or praying will keep them up. Similarly, some medical conditions are terminal and no amount of wishing, hoping, or praying will keep the person alive — at most, only expensive technological intervention will keep the body alive even though the mind is long gone.
Pretending that the person will come back is no more sensible than pretending that a collapsed building will reconstruct itself and while some people may need to tell themselves fictions at first in order to come to grips with reality, they will have to be brought around to reality so they can continue living — and better sooner rather than later. This may require a great deal of care, tact, and careful phrasing, but it has to be done... and I wouldn't want to be responsible for it, frankly.
Dr. Michael Sise, trauma medical director at Scripps Mercy Hospital in San Diego, called the study "a great contribution" to one of the most intense issues doctors face.
Sise, a Catholic doctor working in a Catholic hospital, said miracles don't happen when medical evidence shows death is near. "That's just not a realistic situation," he said.
Sise recalled a teenager severely injured in a gang beating who died soon afterward at his hospital. The mother "absolutely did not want to withdraw" medical equipment despite the severity of her child's brain injuries, which ensured that she would never wake up, Sise said. "The mom was playing religious tapes in the room and obviously was very focused on looking for a miracle."
Wait, "miracles" don't occur once people are past the point that biology medical intervention can bring a person back? Doesn't this mean that "miracles" only occur in cases where it's possible for the body to heal itself and/or medical professionals can fix what's wrong? This limits the concept of "miracle" to "whatever is naturally and materially possible," which hardly sounds like a real "miracle" anymore. If a miracle is simply an event that can occur naturally, but may be unlikely, then it's no longer a supernatural event or a supernatural intervention.
For the concept to mean anything religiously, it has to at least include events that are not possible naturally in a wholly material system. This, though, would mean that we would have to see cases of people not dying even though they are past the point which their own body or modern medicine can fix the damage naturally and materially. If that never happens, doesn't this qualify as proof that miracles don't happen? Furthermore, if believers start redefining "miracle" to simply be natural but unlikely events, doesn't this qualify as a tacit admission that the traditional concept of a "supernatural miracle" is useless, empty, and/or false?
Comments
Thank you for this excellent article. It is an eye opener for me. Science has done a lot for humanity. A lot more than I had truly realized because I take these discoveries for granted most of the time. They have made life easier for most people, especially in the area of communications. Who would have thought ten or twenty years ago that you could talk to or see someone half way around the earth in a nano second. It is amazing. But scientific discoveries and/or principles are only useful as they are applied to a relative sitation. My question is, what has science done to stop the evil that is on the increase and out of control?
It is obvious that religion can be evil or good. There are many evil things that are done in the name of religion and these are man-made religions. When it is man-made it is naturally evil because man is basically and naturally evil.
There are many evil things done in the name of Christianity that are evil and sometimes down right despicable. When this evil occurs, it is not true Christianity. One word sums up true Christianity and that is love, unconditional love. If this central principle was pacticed, what a kind of world would it be?
>My question is, what has science done to stop the evil that is on the increase and out of control?
Nothing. Good point.
(One word sums up true Christianity and that is love, unconditional love. If this central principle was pacticed, what a kind of world would it be?)
If this is the definition of true Christianity, then, there never has been, nor will there ever be a true Christian. So, where does that put everyone? Back to square one.
Paul:
(When it is man-made it is naturally evil because man is basically and naturally evil.)
I don’t we are basically and naturally evil. If I thought this were true, then, no one should be surprised if I do something evil.
Austin:
Nothing. Good point.
Yes, good point. But, science by itself has nothing to do with good or evil. But, we can use science to do good or do evil. That is up to us.
As a Christian I must say to both parties, we are wasting our time trying to convince each other on the existence of God. As Christians we know what we know and they hold to what they believe.
We are both looking at the same evidence with each of us drawing our own conclusions. The natural existence of the earth and the heaven above clearly shows the existence of God and there is no denying. But the evidence we need to look at is the nation of Israel.
Thou Israel have forsaken their God they are his greatest testimony to his might and power, Israel plays a every important roll in declaring the presence of God in our world and the display of his power to sustain and keep us.
It is the will of God to scatter the people all over the world placing them under the rule of other nations, he then spare theirs lives and took them back to the land of promise. Now surrounded on every side by their enemies, they are untouchable, simply because God has placed his shield around them.
In the future he will bring to pass one more event, repeating what he had done in Egypt.
He will bring the whole world against the nation, and when it seem to the nation that they are about to over run Israel, God will simply destroy the advancing forces.
Psalm 2 is a prophecy of the future of Israel and what the end result will be of the nations that gathered against her. People say that the bible is contradicting simply because they are un-aware that God said, he has declared the end from the beginning.
Genesis 12:1-7 is a clear promise to Abraham and his descendants, written 2000 years ago, and now look at the nation of Israel and tell me is this is not simply the will of God. A promise made thousands of years ago is now coming into play.
This is how to look at the scripture. It is not a mist, it’s all in plane view, their are time lines to consider and it calls for a watchful eye, constant observation. Scientists and astronomers observe the heavens and the earth, but we Christians observe the word of God.
It’s simply, if some one living say that they are going to do something and did we know that we can trust that person, but if they say that they are going to do something and not do it, they are a liar.
Only the living can bring to pass something they have promised, the dead are inactive causing no effect. Now God said that he would give them the land and he is doing it and at the same time preserving the nation along the way.
You can deny God but you can’t deny the existence of Israel, and if Israel is here with us then God is, for he is in the midst of the people.
What evil is “on the increase and out of control”?
Feel free to show how.
Prove it.
If that were true, there wouldn’t be so much sincere disagreement over it.
For that conclusion to hold, you’ll have to show that no other factors can be responsible — like, for example, the desire of Jewish people to have a homeland.
If your god is responsible for the existence of Israel, does that mean that your god is responsible for the suffering of Palestinian Christians at the hands of the Israeli government and Israeli settlers?
>>My question is, what has science done to stop the evil that is on the increase and out of control?
I agree with Cline here. Rape rates are down almost 80 percent from the 1970s in the US. We no longer have slavery as a legal institution. Violent crimes are high in the US, but in many areas on the decline–although media reports of them have increased exponentially. I can see from a media perspective how a viewer would believe “things are getting worse” somehow–but in reality that’s just a hype.
We now have groups like NATO to help resolve international issues–and that’s got to be a positive step for international nonviolent resolutions. And we have international watchdog groups like Amnesty International. I don’t always agree with them, but I wouldn’t say they’re on the side of increasing evil in the planet.
Most social animals exhibit empathy and sympathy. I think it’s actually abusive to tell a child that people are inherently wicked. If I had a child and told it every day it was an evil thing–people would think I was a horrible parent who was undermining the child’s self-esteem. And yet religion drills it into how many of these young people on a consistent basis? And somehow we still have a majority that finds this to be a positive and uplifting belief system. It tears people down by convincing them humanity is horrid, and then builds them back up by telling them their only redemption is to swallow a pack of myths as literal truths–or be lost for all eternity. What person could make successful life choices and critical decisions after being told they’re wisdom is folly and their nature is shameful and wicked? So many young people strike out in adolescence, and fail, then run back to the only system they ever knew, which, not surprising works better. Black and white is much easier to process than dealing with shades of gray when nobody has equipped you with the knowledge or skills to handle anything other than black and white.
No wonder they thing religion is the way to go and life without it cannot be fulfilling or happy. Of course it can’t if you’re not equipped to stand on your own two feet, without a manual to explain to you how to behave (because you’ve never been taught to adequately think situations through on your own).
Many times the “evil” we see is the result of a society that has been spoon fed a steady diet of religion and ignorance, that is incapable of critical thought. They can be educated and they can learn, but can they reason things out in a healthy way? Not, I think, without a lot of remediation.
What is “evil”? Gay people getting a marriage license or buring a female child to death for the dishonor of being raped–or a single woman having consenting sex? Thinking it through should result in a sane person recognizing that gays getting married should be a nonissue for anyone other than gays. I have no cause to be concerned about gays getting married. But I have every cause to be concerned about a young girl being burned alive.
Is it “evil” to oppress gays or is it “evil” for gays to want the same rights as everyone else? Is it even for an umarried woman to have sex or is it even to brutally murder her for doing so?
It should be no surprise that “evil” is on the rise, as burning these women alive is now being impeded by a more civil majority worldview–and oppression of the rights of minority groups is being stopped. If I’m the group that wants to burn others alive and oppress them, these advances represent a very scary threat, indeed, I imagine.
>One word sums up true Christianity and that is love, unconditional love. If this central principle was pacticed, what a kind of world would it be?
Quickly to add, it would be harsh. Christian “love” is defined by what the Bible claims god says is “best” for us. This includes, for example, beating children. Jesus preached in support of the Hebrew Laws, which imposed some horribly harsh penalities.
The question isn’t whether or not we love each other, it’s what do we mean by “love”? If I mean that I should beat my child (don’t spare the rod), because it’s best for his well-being, and as a parent, I want what is best for him/her, that’s a sort of “love” I can probably do without.
Likewise, if love is about telling slaves to obey their masters (as Jesus did)–and not instructing masters that it is incorrect to own human beings–that’s the sort of manifestation of “love” that fails to inspire me.
I think loving each other is a good idea–but when a person tells me their definition of love has room for beatings and slavery, I’m not sure we’re talking about the same thing.
(I think loving each other is a good idea–but when a person tells me their definition of love has room for beatings and slavery, I’m not sure we’re talking about the same thing.)
Tracie. It always comes back to the law of reciprocity, doesn’t it?!
First you need a system which keeps the law out of it. Patients’ families should not be able to override the judgement of doctors by going to the law. Decisions on life and death should be decided between doctor and relatives with the doctor having the major say. After all it has to be up to the doctor to decide when his time and the use of expensive and possibly limited medical equipment is justified. Also the doctor in making logical decisions should not be held hostage to irrational beliefs. If after a death relatives want to take legal action against a doctor and hospital they probably won’t get far in court.
Kevin wrote:
“As Christians we know what we know and they hold to what they believe.”
You can usually tell which side in a debate is the weaker one by who has to resort to lying the most often and most blatantly.
“Believe” is what the religious are left with, because anything that involves information, knowledge (”know”) clearly dismisses all religions as the superstitious nonsense that they are. Yet Kevin flips the terms around, and pretends that belief is the domain of those who use evidence, and knowledge or knowing is the result of parental indoctrination in Bronze Age myth.
Kevin also writes that “we are wasting our time trying to convince each other on the existence of [gods].”
I disagree. Since I’ve been born, the percentage of Canadians who do not believe in gods has ballooned, from about 5% of the population to over 25%, as of the 2008 Harris-Decima poll. I’d say we atheists are doing a rather impressive job in convincing people to abandon religious belief - particularly the young, who are obviously rejecting the superstitions of their parents.
>My question is, what has science done to stop the evil that is on the increase and out of control?
Is criminology a science. I think so. These scientists (criminologists) use the scientific method. The propose theories and gather data and expand our understanding of human behavior, then they apply these findings to find and prosecute criminals. The hole field of physiology (a science) attempts to understand human behavior and improve our lives.
Historically, did not science put an end to most of the evil perpetrated by religions caused by our fears of the unknown? If evil is humans behaving immorally and morality is as Linus Pauling defines it, the minimization of harm, then science has virtually eliminated may forms of evil. For example, we no long kill or imprison folks with mental disorders. We you think about it science and knowledge is why don’t burn witches anymore. Racism, an evil that has existed for most of mankind’s history was essentially proven by science as wrong and that the only differences between races was the amount of melanin in in skin. DNA evidence has freed many from death row.
I think if one thinks about it for a while science has made this a much better world and has eliminated much of the evil that used to exist. Would you want to travel to the past and take you chances that some priest won’t put you to death because of something that science had not revealed as false yet?
Perhaps I am looking at evil wrong and have my definitions warped. Has science decreased, at least, the types of evil perpetrated by humans? Maybe total evil has increased… What evil is being referred to here?
Prayer can perhaps “do a lot” if the patient is doing it. (aka, relaxing, being calm, allowing your body to heal and fight, instead of thinking of negative things, releasing all the wrong chemicals etc, letting yourself die)
But I highly doubt that my praying for someone helps anyone but myself. And if a god needs to be contacted in order to do something kind, then he’s not quite omnipotent. And if a god needs you to “grease the wheels” with placations, that also isn’t good.
It seems cruel that a god would save someone because you prayed for them, but not save the person in the next hospital bed because no one it praying for them.