Healed by Faith, Explained by Idiots

Ok, so I don’t mean to call anyone an idiot; I’m just saying that most of the explanations of faith healings are poorly presented. I mean, these healings happen so much, you’d think that someone would be documenting them better.

So, how much evidence do you need?

I imagine someday, while making a point about the power of belief systems, asking the audience of PhD’s to consider a hypothetical situation. Let’s say I present the story of a man with stage 4 esophageal cancer with a few months to live. As unbelieving as he was, his son convinced him to visit a prayer room, and upon receiving prayer, he falls over and wakes up totally healed. In fact, I have all the medical documentation that you could ask for. On top of that, now this man prays for people and THEY get healed of blindness, deafness, feeling in the limbs, and cancer.

Now… one of three things just happened:

1)      You’ve always believed in the supernatural, and faith healings are no big deal to you

2)      I’ve just changed your world view away from naturalism

3)      No matter how much evidence I give you, you will find some way to keep your old belief system

Haha, I’ve been in my field long enough to bet that I may be the only person in that room, who believes that people have been, will, and can be healed by faith. I know the people I work with long enough to know that the whole room would be of the 3rd persuasion. That is all to say, that it doesn’t really matter how much evidence I give you, but for my sake, I’d like to remember my own stories and experiences.

Naturalists, however, aren’t alone in their refusal to consider the possibility of faith healings. Most Christians I know don’t believe that this happens today. In fact, the Christians get even MORE offended than the naturalists. It’s all so irrational.. hahaha. Seriously, faith healings are talked about so much in the New Testament; you’d wonder what Bible these Jesus people read.

I was opened to the idea of healings, but I didn’t have the level of faith, nor the evidence to fathom how much of it happens around me. In my previous post, I gave a recount of the entire experience of healing encounters, up until this past year.

In June, I was at a conference with some of the smartest and creative PhD’s and researchers at the Assilomar retreat center in Monterey for the Foundation of Digital Games. Unintentionally co-located, was a group that wore nametags which read, “Bible Seminar.” Out of that cohort, I don’t believe there was a person under the age of 40, mostly 50+.

One of my colleagues says, “There goes Sherol, networking with another conference,” as I went to go sit with people that I had no reason to talk to.

“What group is this?” I ask. “It’s the Church of Christian Science,” the older man says to me. “Sounds familiar,” I think to myself and ask, “What is this church known for?” “The man pauses and responds, “We’re typically known for our stance on miracle healings.”

It took me a bit to realize that these were those people known to not take their kids to doctors and reject all medical treatment in the name of faith. “How radical are these people?” I wonder.

There was this table of women that really loved my questions. Personally, their answers to my questions weren’t very satisfying, although one lady gave me their supplementary scripture. Now, looking back, I think my mentality is a bit disrespectful of what these people were so passionate about.

I mean, maybe they’re unusually right about one thing or another; however, if that is the case, they weren’t convincing in how they’d explain the reasons why we live or exist. As I come to know more about Christianity, the focus on Jesus only grows more significant. The Christian Scientists placed more emphasis that we are already good, and that darkness isn’t the enemy of light, just the absence of it. Fundamentally, I have a hard time accepting that evil doesn’t exist, nor do I admire Christians who put Jesus in the back seat.

Perhaps, they were just being more Universalist, because they didn’t want to turn me off; though, good logic is better than vague explanations. For example, they explained life as being in one room and death as just opening a door and walking into another room. These explanations seem to make their believers feel better about life, and less of a reason to live. I guess I’ll have to post my own answers someday to these questions to show what I mean.

I remember going through their Christian Scientist book with my roommates, these are Atheist and Agnostic PhD students in Computer Science and Molecular and Developmental Biology. I’ll consider that we may not have been fair to poke fun at their definitions surrounding faith healings, but its presentation could afford to be either (1) more inspiring or (2) better supported.

A couple weeks later, after a friend had mentioned IHOP, I found that the International House of Prayer was having an event in Fremont around July 4th for Asian Americans. There, I picked up my first book on the prophetic, by Mike Bickle (more on the prophetic another time).

A few days after that, I found myself sitting in the lobby of a foursquare church in Santa Cruz, waiting to hear some guy from Bethel, named Joaquin Evans, talk about healings. Right before the event, I was reading the chapter on how God chooses who he uses to give which gifts too, and often it’s not who you’d think. In fact, you may often be quite uncomfortable with the sort of people God chooses. Haha, there was no way I could ever have pictured what Joaquin Evans turned out to be.

Dave Gschwend opened the night, giving Joaquin some introduction along the lines of being the bubbles atop a champagne glass. Joaquin laughed his way through the night and, uh, yea, I was like WTF? He was so happy and full of joy, and I was so weary and bitter. You can imagine my disbelief and hesitation towards all of this.

Joaquin and his team told story after story of unbelievable miracles—blind eyes seeing and deaf ears opening. These stories can be found all over the internet, personal account after personal account with medical documentation that evidences healings of faith. Additionally, people there at the event were claiming to be healed of pain and having legs grow out.

So, where am I at with all this? Haha, I need to write shorter posts, or I’ll never get anything done, but, it’s been a year and I’ve seen people healed for myself. I pray for them and their pain is gone. I can’t explain it at all. When I pray now, I see people weeping, I see people regain hope. Before all this, I didn’t even really like praying for people… It seemed like such insincere gestures. Now, my friends and I have weekly stories with strangers and friends, completely blown away by the results of faithfulness and love.

A year ago, I met Ricky Larson. He gave his testimony with the Bethel group. He had stage 4 cancer and was healed by a young boy up in Redding. Shortly after his visit, he decided God wanted him to move to Santa Cruz. I remember the first time he came to visit our group, said we were full of love here. I walked right up to him, in my unbelief, and I asked him 20 questions in regards to how he could’ve possibly been healed through prayer. Now, he prays for people which result in stories of the most amazing healings. I don’t know what else to tell you, but that his medical reports are accessible. Let’s consider the possibilities:

  1. Maybe he’s lying? No, I’ve been this man’s friend for 1 year now, there’s just no way he’s lying. There’s no gain for him to lie, there’s no way he could live this lie so convincingly.
  2. Maybe he’s crazy? No, he’s perfectly sane. He prays for people with remarkable faith and they either recover or they feel better. Something always happens.
  3. Maybe it’s all coincidence? Sure, maybe he didn’t really have cancer… but at this point, it is at least just as absurd to believe it’s not true than to believe it is.

The only other explanation I can fathom is that acts of faith somehow activate healing agents from our brain that can grow out limbs, restore sight, and cure cancer– I would consider that naturalist explanation. So, if you’re wondering why don’t people just get prayer instead of remain in pain, I’m asking myself the same question. If you think that if this stuff were true, you would have experienced it for yourself by now, I’d say, “you CAN experience it, why choose ignorance? haha.”

Sure, not everyone gets healed, but that doesn’t change the fact that so many do. Just read the Gospels and meet my friend, Ricky.

18 thoughts on “Healed by Faith, Explained by Idiots

    1. Sherol. You have become such a wonderful woman of God . I am so proud and honored to call you my friend ! Blessings & Grace

  1. I just wrote a good coupla paragraphs and WordPress destroyed them because I didn’t fill in mail. That’s fine, a second draft will improve precision:

    Everything science has rigorously observed so far says cancerous cells don’t just teleport out of bodies, and entropy does not spontaneously jump to order endothermically. That doesn’t mean I’m entirely Number 3 though- if you show me a statistically significant sample of successful faith healing in peer-reviewed journals, I’m there.

    If miracle healing were real, it would be relatively easy to document. A few before and after shots of broken bones, or white blood cell counts, etc etc. There have been numerous studies on prayer healing, where faithful people pray for healing unknown to their subjects, and then the results are charted. Results- either side statistically insignificant from background noise. You could claim that God knows when scientists are watching and will always refuse to heal in those cases, or mind wipes any scientists who do find the evidence so they forget to report on it. Either case would explain how miracle healing could exist and have zero evidence in scientific literature. But I find both those explanations… dangerously close to solipsism, and madness. In that explanation it’s like there are two universes, the real, rational one bound by physics, and this second magical one. The Harry Potter Universe hiding invisibly in the bricks, if it were. Occam’s Razor tells us that given two explanations- 1. God just doesn’t exist and 2. God exists and secretly faith heals people, but only if no scientists are watching, or if any scientists are watching, She mind wipes them, that we select 1, the simpler one.

    As for your friend “lying”, I think untruth is a sliding scale. Humans have a grand capacity for self-delusion, wrongly attributing cause and effect, cult-like belief in things that stretch rationality or provability, and so many more things that while not inherently “bad” or malicious, DO make us really unreliable explainers of the universe just from our own gut feelings. How many millenia did we go believing that evil spirits caused sickness, earth was the center of the universe and was probably flat. Then we developed microscopes and formula and statistics and some research protocols and we started to learn SOME things. Not really the “Why” so much, but sometimes the “Hows”. We can see we are made up of cells and we can float up over the earth and see it is round and we can count how many radiation ticks are coming off some slightly-radioactive carbon.

    I want to win you back to the side of rationality as much as you want to witness the faith side of things to others I think! We both think our point of view has something meaningful and true to offer to those who don’t see it.

    1. “If miracle healing were real, it would be relatively easy to document.”

      That’s what I’m saying… I’m at the place, where I see them so much that someone needs to document them better….

      Your comment leads me to consider that scientific rigor, as we know it today, is relatively new.

      I mean, faith healings were prevalent in the New Testament, back 2000 years ago… and dwindled probably by the institutionalization of Christianity and it’s misuses for political gain.

      It comes back in these waves…. in the last century, it’s the pentecostals and the charismatics that lived as if the supernatural was natural. Typically, these were highly zealous uneducated individuals…. bad bad combination for the rest of the world…

      Hence why the post is called, “healed by faith, explained by idiots…”…..

      If acceptable scientific documentation were to be available, I believe this would not be possible until our present time now considering the evolution of the scientific investigation and the ability for those who are the “experts” in faith healings to intellectually present the data that is accessible to people of any belief system… that is, rationally.

      And… of course, assuming that the New Testament is true.


      “if it were. Occam’s Razor tells us that given two explanations- 1. God just doesn’t exist and 2. God exists and secretly faith heals people, but only if no scientists are watching, or if any scientists are watching, She mind wipes them, that we select 1, the simpler one.”

      Option (3)… Bad science… I may be a bit cynical when it comes to Christians… but honestly, they all think they’re prayers are just as good as the next person’s… They all believe that we have relatively the same healing touch… In my experiences, it’s just not true….

      Most Christians don’t have the faith that it takes to pray for healings. My initial thought is that, the scientists probably had faithless or superficial Christians pray for healings.

      Option (4)…. Only scratching the surface… I think maybe there aren’t any scientists that have done the study rigorously to find a definitive answer. Let’s all admit that the rhetoric used is extremely biased AGAINST anything supernatural. I think the only way to balance that is to have more scientists that are more opened or even on the other end of the spectrum trying to justify “truth.”

      Post-modern interpretation of scientific documentation basically assumes that everything is biased. As a researcher I know that I will only go as far as to prove that MY hypothesis is true…. You know what I mean… I’m not going to do another study to make sure my hypothesis is still true. We don’t have time to do that. We wait for someone with the opposing hypothesis to prove us wrong…

      What i’m saying is that no one with the opposing hypothesis, “pro” supernatural has stepped into the ring.


      Shane, what if I could show you the medical documents of the disappearing cancer?…

  2. If I had access to documents in question, I’d tear into them with a fiery skepticism, because in the logic chain as presented they are one of the weakest links.

    I would: Look up the physician involved, get their credentials and practice history. I would requisition the lab results (if any) and find some credentialed physician I trust (preferably more than one) see if the lab results make sense and verify claims. I would try to see if any of the samples from “before” were still kept in a fridge somewhere so we could compare pre and post leukocyte counts. I would try and run current tests on the same patient, with consent, to see what the current cancer level is.

    Cancer does sometimes go into remission, I mean DNA wants to heal itself. But I think we can all agree that “natural” cases of remission would be slow things where cells repair over time. Not this instant “teleportation” thing we seem to be talking about where someone prays and “poof” it is gone.

    Misdiagnosis and a form of let’s say “placebo disease”, “feeling” like one still has cancer seems to be a pretty workable explanation to me. Humans are VERY persuadable. If “doctors” (maybe they’re not qualified, I don’t know) are telling you and telling you have cancer, it is easy to start feeling kind of sick, a truth which becomes more true the more you play into it. I’m not saying that’s necessarily the case here, I don’t know anything about the facts of this case, but I do believe someone could be punk’d into believing they had cancer when they didn’t if they were told it enough. I can even think of reasons why a non-scrupulous fraud would persuade someone they did have cancer- you get to order up all these expensive tests and rack up billable hours, etc etc. Fudge a few lab tests here and there… heck… maybe there is even _some_ cancerous cells found, and you just buff the diagnosis up to “Stage 4” (whatever that means, I’m not a cancer expert.) Sound a little conspiratorial? I suppose. Is it less fantastic than a super-energy deity shredding physics as we understand it to teleport cancer cells out of the universe? No, of the two, the “accidental or deliberate fraud” explanation seems MUCH more earthbound to me.

    This, to me, cuts to the heart of science. How do we know where the fraud and human bullshit, the opinion and nuance and “He-said, she-said” accusations stop and verifiable Truth starts? In this case, (and I would say ALL cases), it is where hard facts start, where verifiable and repeatable experiments start. Humans can and do lie, but if you get enough neutral, credible people running lab tests and the numbers all come up the same, you start to build a case that is MUCH different than words and opinions. If you take ten samples of this guy’s blood, send them to ten different qualified labs and the results come back within .1% of each other, we’re making a case.

    Heh. I guess it’s like those Jerry Springer shows… “That dun ain’t muh baby, nuh way nuh how.” “This DNA chromatograph matches your DNA 99.9%” “Dadgummit.”

    I agree that for thousands of years there’s been no way to cut through that. If a woman said a certain man was the father of child, and he retorted that she is a liar and a witch, well, those were equally valid points given the technology of the times. We have only had a few decades of good science, even fewer of quick DNA scans and such.

    I grant that there is probably something of a bias against the supernatural in science. But I don’t doubt that in the name of pure inquiry, SOME people HAVE done experiments to really give the question an honest shake. (Examples- those prayer experiments.) So, while there is a bias, there is also a body of evidence of 10,000s of cases where the natural explanation was the one the evidence bore out.

    What I like best is that just because there is a bias, doesn’t mean people aren’t free to try and create rigorous, replicatable proof of faith healing. Anyone who could get it up to standards could get their study published. I attribute the lack of such studies being published not to intense bias on the part of the peer reviewers, but instead to the fact that no one can do it.

    If you can find reliable evidence of it, I promise I will reconsider my position.

    1. i believe that is the point of my article. that no matter what evidence i could show, there are infinite holes to search for.

      as far as placebo disease, i totally addressed that as well… that it may just be coincidence that he got better at the point of prayer.

      Finally, i dont think its good science to say no one has studied faith healings b/c no one can do it. if i wasnt doing a phd in CS… i’d do it… i believe it’s verifiable. Maybe I will after my phd…. haha

      i do believe that there are no studies done, b/c most scientists are naturalists. it’d be like saying black people arent as smart as white people b/c you don’t see as many of them going to college.

      the pool of researchers impacts the resources available… for instance, the GREs are tailored to white males. You are at a known disadvantage at taking the GREs for being black or hispanic. If no one studied the demographic biases of the GRE’s… one could just say that black and hispanic people aren’t good at the GRE’s b/c they aren’t as smart as white people based off of some superficial research of GRE scores.

      In regards to researchers, first of all there are so few Christians getting PhDs, second of all ALMOST ALL well-educated Christians don’t believe in miracle healings. Finally, the ones that I know that do, don’t have any balls about it… haha.

      I’d just be happy if people would consider the opportunity, which you already do 🙂

      I’ll keep my eyes opened for a good study, or maybe do my own 🙂

      Until then, this church in Redding, CA is where most of the healings occur in the US.

      I’ve visited, and yea, they do seem a but unscholarly about their presentation of data, but after you meet enough people cured of blindness, cancer, and deafness…. Once you see the leftover wheelchairs from people being able to walk again… whether it is curing a placebo disease or giving people the will to fight, people walk out of the prayer room better than when they walked in.

      i think other than some rigorous study, which may take over a year…. you just have to meet someone who was healed by faith…. and then meet another person…. and after a while, you’d have t consider that something about prayer definitely heals people… natural or not…

      1. As for choosing to study faith healing or CS… if you even remotely believe that faith healings are a possibility, how could you then decide that studying CS is somehow more important?

        Studies on the efficacy of prayer and faith healing have been done… they just keep coming up negative. I guess to believe me further I’ll have to start looking for links.

      2. Let’s consider the timeline….

        I met Rick Larson (alleged cancer healee) a year ago (almost exactly). That was my first time (as an adult) ever meeting anyone like that in person. When we did meet, I grilled the heck outta him. That is to say that a year ago I was quite a skeptic. Now that I’ve seen it for myself a number of times, I’m less of a skeptic.

        I mean, primarily our callings may not be to scientifically prove the efficacy of prayer (natural or not). Being in the last year or 2 of a PhD in CS is probably a good reason to hold off starting a new career. I think God could use a gal with a PhD in CS, because there aren’t many of us wanting to fill those shoes.

        Other than that, I dunno what to say. You can link me to the studies of faith healings and I can take a look, I guess. I just feel that probably all of them take too much for granted. I can tell you story after story of people being healed through prayer. I’m willing to consider that they are psychologically healing themselves in the natural, or perhaps that person in the wheelchair could walk all along… ya know? Either way, they don’t need a wheel chair anymore, so that’s good. Good thing Rick got prayer, b/c now he doesn’t think he’s dying from the cancer that he maybe didn’t really have to begin with… But if it weren’t for the prayer he’d still think he had cancer.

        Here’s another story for you, a recent one about a friend of mine who just got her PhD in statistics. She’s deathly allergic to wheat… Well, until May 11th.

        I was in the room when this man prayed for her, without knowing what her illness was. He said he saw a vision of her happily running through the wheat field. She started to cry. She doesn’t really cry in public…. but i remember what she said (I actually have video of the whole thing)… She said, “Wheat is my worst allergy, if I’m around it, I can die.”

        I’ve known her for years, she’d have asthma attacks all the time. All she eats is chicken, cheese, and yogurt. If she had to pick up a pizza, she’d have to put it in the trunk of her car in order to transport it home and still be able to breathe.

        I was at her house a couple weeks ago and made biscuits and cinnamon rolls…. She told me she’s glad I did that… I was like, “huh?”… She said that she used to not even be able to walk past cinnamon rolls being made in the mall without her lungs locking up… I thought, “oh crap, was I not supposed to do that?”…. Actually, it’s a miracle that she can breathe with that stuff cooking in her home.

        I didn’t realize that she had been healed… Apparently, she was. It’s not like something overtly magical happens. It’s just that when people get prayer, they often recover from things that have been ailing them for possibly decades, in her case, 11 years.

      3. My best guess on the wheat thing is back into the “Psychological” explanation. Wait, that’s number 2. Number 1 is actually “un-diagnosed disease such as Ciliac’s Disease which resolved naturally”. But let’s look at 2:

        Example- there are recorded cases of people dying from “Black Magic/Voodoo”. In very superstitious societies, a medicine man can put a “curse” on his victim while the victim (who believes with all their heart that this is a real thing that can happen) basically has a panic attack about their oncoming death. Essentially they get so scared their adrenal system overloads, their heart quits and they actually die.

        Can we agree that the medicine man did not actually ask God to reach out and kill someone? Although maybe we shouldn’t rule that out. Logically, if someone can be “faith healed”, then, other than God being willing to do it or not, couldn’t someone be “faith killed”? Surely there were some faithful people who fervently prayed that Hitler would just drop dead of a heart attack or something. How would God respond to that? “Sorry, I prefer that he kill 9 million men, women and Children as part of My plan.” Or “I may be All-powerful, but not so powerful that I’m willing to kill even one person (anymore).” (Since God kills lost of people in the Bible.)

        But anyway, my point there, is if very superstitious people can literally will their hearts to stop in fear, it doesn’t seem beyond possible that people could psychologically work up a placebo allergy to wheat. But there are plenty of other natural causes. I don’t know all the details about Celiac’s disease, but it sounds like it could be that. Sometimes people outgrow allergies as their epigenomes continue to express themselves in young adulthood.

        Anyway, I’d stake money on one or more of these all-natural pathways completely responsible for her wheat allergy clearing up. The “humans using psychic powers and/or contacting a giant omnipotent energy being who teleported the subject’s DNA into non-allergic state” is my ABSOLUTE LAST explanation.

        Now, you’ve got one point that I stumble on- that if it is a “placebo illness”, is there anything so wrong about countering it out with a “placebo cure”? If believing makes people happy, what’s the harm? To that I must point to the Red Cross Studies of the hundreds of children who died because they had a REAL matter-and-biology disease that CAN’T be fixed just by switching around software a little bit. It seems to me the sheer number of REAL deaths outweighs the smaller placebo cures. If Satan existed he’d be glad those 200 Red Cross kids got only faith healing (and died anyway) instead of getting “real” care…because Satan (if existed) likes it when children die.

      4. I’d totally buy the natural explanation for prayer healing someone. That’s a point that I make in the original post. Natural or not, prayer does heal people.

        I’d even buy that maybe it was a coincidence, but you know, after you see enough coincidences you’d have to assume that correlation is possible.

        … It’s not like they said she was cured and she decided to stop taking meds and to never see a doctor again.

        Those children died, b/c their parents made an unwise decision to not see or consult a doctor. In no way do I think that prayer should replace modern science. I think you should have both, especially if one of them is free and nearly effortless.

  3. http://www.springerlink.com/content/ql345l2h434666l5/

    Journal of Behavioral Medicine
    Volume 30, Number 4, 329-338, DOI: 10.1007/s10865-007-9106-7

    “The effects of distant intercessory prayer are examined by meta-analysis and it is concluded that no discernable effects can be found. The literature regarding frequency of prayer, content of prayer, and prayer as a coping strategy is subsequently reviewed. Suggestions for future research include the conduct of experimental studies based on conceptual models that include precise operationally defined constructs, longitudinal investigations with proper measure of control variables, and increased use of ecological momentary assessment techniques. ”

    So, while they found nothing in this study, they are even then suggestion possible future research. Why? Because in science, you suggest future avenues even if you find nothing.

    Let’s see what the American Cancer Society has to say about, well, the miraculous healing of cancer. (Can we agree they are an expert body who wants to see people get better and probably has no major bias or religious agenda?)


    “One review published in 1998 looked at 172 cases of deaths among children treated by faith healing instead of conventional methods. These researchers estimated that if conventional treatment had been given, the survival rate for most of these children would have been more than 90 percent, with the remainder of the children also having a good chance of survival. A more recent study found that more than 200 children had died of treatable illnesses in the United States over the past thirty years because their parents relied on spiritual healing rather than conventional medical treatment.

    In addition, at least one study has suggested that adult Christian Scientists, who generally use prayer rather than medical care, have a higher death rate than other people of the same age.”

    Anyway, the content isn’t even my primary point- my point was that here are four examples of studies where science took a good solid look at the question of faith healing and came up with nada. Maybe the reason these Christiain PhDs are concluding faith healing isn’t happening is not because of guts, but instead because that’s the correct conclusion actually born out by the facts.

    1. So, I don’t believe all prayer heals people. I believe that prayers like the ones that Jesus did, only work when people actually believe they REALLY know God.

      There are plenty of people who pray who don’t believe they know God intimately…. These arguments are moot, b/c to most people, prayer is prayer. Earlier, I’d said that I find that to not be the case. Where did they get the people from to do the praying? That makes or breaks the study for me.

      I know, I know… to follow my logic is to assume that one religion prays better than another. I’m only championing a small subset of faith healings anyhow 🙂

      I’m more likely to accept studies of the following:

      – One’s that follow healing rooms that are known to have high percentage of healings: Bethel, IHOP.. etc.
      – One’s that follow people who are known to pray for people and see them healed… Like Heidi Baker, Joaquin Evans, Todd White, Etc.
      – One’s that follow-up on people who have been healed or claim to have been healed.


      I only see one study, not four… and I can’t access it right now, haha… Maybe when I’m at school, I’ll get it without having to pay $$$.


      “(Can we agree they are an expert body who wants to see people get better and probably has no major bias or religious agenda?)”

      I’d say that, according to studies on cognitive bias, to say there is no major bias is taking much for granted.



      OMG…. please don’t defend the Christians. Haha… If the Atheists and the Christians gang up on me, I don’t know what I’ll do.

      I didn’t say that Christian PhD’s don’t believe in faith healings b/c they don’t have guts… I was saying that the ones that DO BELIEVE in faith healings don’t have the balls to do anything about it… I believe that most Christian PhD’s don’t believe in faith healings b/c they don’t have any faith… LOL.

      Also, in my post, I was trying to say that the Church of Christian Science is super sketchy. I’ve never seen anyone tell someone to not go see a doctor or to go off their meds.

  4. When I say “major bias”, I mean something like “The KKK may have some bias against African-Americans”. Like, that bias is the core of their beliefs. American Cancer society might possibly have some _minor_ bias towards naturalism, but the fact that they even have a section on their site discussing the possibility shows that it’s not just an automatic write-off for them. For me, it is a lot easier to see someone as neutral even if they don’t place stock in the supernatural. Rejection of the supernatural, for me, need not be automatically written off as proof of bias against it.

    I could easily be projecting, but I’m worried that saying bias exists can extend to “people just don’t agree with me.” Let’s say I didn’t believe in gravity…. and then for EVERY scientific body, no matter how neutral (IEEE, various colleges’ phsyics departments, etc etc) who concluded that gravity pulled things downwards at constant rates in every experiment, I retorted “Well, of COURSE you’d jump to that conclusion, with your ‘Gravity Exists’ bias. You can’t see the TRUTH!” At what point is evidence sufficient to say that an unbiased body of statistically meaningful data was collected?

    A point in your favor, wikipedia’s section on the efficacy of prayer has a Washington Post report that says total cash value of studies done on the issue total around $5 million. If true, that’s less than I would have guessed.

    How much study would you say is enough? Personally, I feel sure that enough studies have been done to discount miracle healing, or even “non-standard placebo manipulation healing”. But maybe it is a little too soon to say that for sure. Global healing budgets are massive, after all. Even .1% of annual health spending spent on “placebo effects” healing could well yield a profit if they found a handful of legitimate heals… from that point of view I can see what you are saying about a bias against all non-proven, non-standard as being pure quackery. But the problem is, a lot of it, let’s say 90%, IS quackery, and it’s pretty hard to find the difference. People are SO ready to believe that almost anything is a miracle cure- ginsing, deer antler, snake oil, etc etc etc, that I’m sure it’s tiring to look into and find the few gems in the rough that actually produce statistically meaningful, dependable heals.

    1. Oh, i guess when u said “major”.. I thought you meant constituent bias. I mean, I don’t think there are any major biases from any PhD’s doing medical research that is along the lines of curing a disease. Doesn’t mean that there aren’t other less-major, yet constituent biases.

      I could study 20 cancer patients who’ve been allegedly healed in a given prayer room within some set frame of time, find that all medical documents were in order with doctors that cannot explain sudden recovery. Then I’ll conclude that there may be some correlation, natural or not. Maybe the correlation is that people who are inclined to go to prayer rooms are also inclined to be instantly cured of cancer.

      That is, of course, if I COULD prove that 20 cancer patients with documents in order and doctors perplexed would be enough to convince you… for some reason, I don’t think you’d even accept 200 cancer patients…. because, actually, I could easily find 20 people who’ve had cancer healed with documentation et al.

      This is the best I have for you right now: http://www.ibethel.org/testimonies

      At some point, you’ll have to ask yourself whether or not you are being unreasonable. Now, I’m not saying you gotta believe in the supernatural. I’m just looking for acknowledgement of some correlation, which isn’t too much of a stretch. Also, I don’t think you are being unreasonable… I think that there just really is no way to prove there is or isn’t a supernatural…. I believe that given a good study, you would acknowledge the benefits of “faith” healings.

      Faith is real… right?… I mean, it exists. So the belief in faith healings doesn’t require a supernatural. It just means that having more faith (which everyone does to some extent) heals sickness by some amount (maybe even all the way).


      Also, it’s possible that one who rejects the supernatural is less likely an expert on the matter than someone who can rationally defend the supernatural to a point of not having conclusive evidence either way or even believing in it. I would trust that someone who believes may know better how to design a study that examines the supernatural.

      I do think that we may be at the point in time where we can utilize science and faith in ways that was never possible before. As a PhD student, I’m constantly at this point of discovery, surrounded by pioneers and trailblazers of many fronts.

      Most people are stuck in a world of “there is nothing new under the sun.”.. which is actually from the Bible… annnd I suppose that is true, but our understanding of the same old stuff changes as we get new tools to play with. I live close to silicon valley where new things appear all the time!

      If I had free time, I’d start with what I believe would yield the best results. I’d start with Bethel Church in Redding, CA. If I wanted more breadth on the matter, I’d check out this Metanexus thing: http://www.metanexus.net/

      In the mean time, I’m sticking with the empirical aspects of “faith” healings.

  5. I got this from metanexus…


    Is Faith Healing Real?

    Many studies in recent years have shown that a person’s state of mind and lifestyle can definitely play a key role in determining his or her state of health. We know that excess stress (or more correctly, one’s inability to deal with excess stress) can eventually lead to such diseases as stroke and heart disease by causing high blood pressure and cholesterol buildup in the arteries. (See book Type A Behavior and Your Heart by Meyer Friedman, 1974 pp 75-83 & 120-121.) And as mentioned above, certain negative lifestyle habits such as excessive – drinking, eating, smoking, etc. can eventually lead to disease and death. We also know that certain negative mental factors (such as hopelessness and inability to express one’s feelings and needs) can suppress the immune system sufficiently to make a person more susceptible to such diseases as cancer. Evidence in support of this can be found in the book The Type C Connection: The Mind Body Link to Cancer and Your Health by Temoshok, 1993, pp. 136-138 and pp 202-209. See also the studies of Glaser & Glaser, et al; Levy & Heberman; and Stein, Schleifer &
    Keller regarding the direct suppressive effects on the immune system by mental states of depression and hopelessness as reported in Norman Cousins’ book Head First: the Biology of Hope, 1989, pp. 39 & 85. Two other studies by the Glasers, also reported in Cousins’ book – pp. 39 & 40, indicated the enhancement of positive emotions can have the effect of boosting immunity.

    If we accept the fact that a person’s state of mind and lifestyle can play a significant role in affecting the body, then it should be obvious that anything that can play a major role in affecting the mind, such as belief and faith, could be a major factor in affecting health and well being.

    Evidence of the power of belief to affect the body healthwise can be found in many studies on the power of the placebo (see for instance the book Timeless Healing: The Power and Biology of Belief, 1996, by Herbert Benson and the section on placebos in Cousins book Head First, pp. 229-232.) Dramatic effects of the power of the placebo on the body were presented above in the section on belief. One classic study showing how the placebo can affect the body was the study reported in Levine (1978) where an expectation or belief that a certain injection would relieve pain led to a release of endorphins (natural pain killers produced by the body) into the bloodstream. This even though unbeknownst to the patient, the injection was merely saline solution.

    However, there is something that needs to be made clear. Although strong belief of being healed can be very effective in producing at least temporary improvement in one’s health (by allowing for a stronger immune response and creating greater peace of mind at least for the moment), in order for this temporary improvement to remain permanent, the belief factor must also be used to help fully absorb the guidance factor so that the immuno-suppressive psychological factors can be more likely to be permanently removed (see Barrios, 1985, pp. 124 & 125). Thus we can see that one way of differentiating between the concept of belief and the concept of faith is to point out that faith usually means “guided” belief or belief in a certain way of life. When we say that a person’s faith healed him, we are saying more than just that the belief he would get well was what got and kept him well. It was his belief plus the positive permanent changes in his state of mind and lifestyle produced by following the new guidelines for living which he incorporated through his new found or re-strengthened faith.

    One way of determining how much more effective faith is than belief alone in affecting permanent healing would be to do a thorough search of the placebo literature or to do further studies on the placebo to determine whether the positive effects of the placebo (or belief alone) are long lasting if there were no significant lifestyle changes also taking place.

    Traditionally, scientists and physicians have placed such faith cures up on the shelf alongside the placebo effect. But what is interesting, even where the placebo effect is concerned, is that it is effectual 30% of the time. To check this out, go to.

    And there’s the rub.

    Because looking at such data, we should not decry the absence of a causative agent. We should really be amazed that through mere belief in efficacy and cure, a cure or relief is achieved. Moreover, this should make us wonder what other bodily functions and conditions can be influenced by something my grandmother would have called “the power of positive thinking.” Perhaps there should be a new bumpersticker: “Prayer changes things…at least 30% of the time”?

    Furthermore, as today’s author observes:

    “Prayer can be defined as a verbal means of delineating the goal you wish to attain with God’s help. For example, the prayer ‘I pray to God that He will heal me (or you) of this affliction or illness’ clearly sets out the goal one wishes to attain. Whether this prayer is answered depends on three things: (1) the strength of the person’s belief (both the person being prayed for and the person doing the praying); (2) the degree to which the individual subsequently incorporates God into his life (i.e., incorporates the guidance factor); and (3) the lawfulness of nature. The latter is important too because prayer should not go against this aspect of God. It would be wiser for someone who has lost a limb, rather than praying for another limb, to pray for the ability to quickly learn how to use an appropriate prosthesis and for the proper state of mind to not feel inferior for having a missing limb, etc.”

    This basic idea that belief alone is not as effective for insuring permanent healing to take place as when the belief is also used to bring about positive lifestyle changes is illustrated when the case of Jolee Marshall is contrasted with some of the other cancer patients I have worked with:

    Jolee Marshall: After a very strong emotional upheaval, Jolee had developed an inoperable cancerous tumor of the intestines and had been given two weeks to live. I worked with her for a period of four hours [with the hypnotic belief-building and imaging techniques section of the self-programmed control-psychoneurourimmunological (SPC-PNI) approach presented in the chapter on cancer in Towards Greater Freedom & Happiness (Barrios, 1985)] and left her with a very strong belief that her body’s natural defenses would clear away the tumor. The tumor did disappear (in fact overnight) much to the astonishment of her doctor and Jolee did live cancer-free for one more year. However, upon experiencing another similar emotional upheaval one year after my first and only session with Jolee, the cancer returned and this time Jolee soon succumbed to it.

    The strong belief that she would be cured was apparently sufficient to heal her for one year. However, in the case of Jolee, the complete SPC-PNI approach (which now also includes helping the patient make certain necessary lifestyle changes) had not been followed. (Unfortunately, at this point in time I had not fully realized that belief alone was not enough.) Because of this, there had been no real follow-through for making the necessary changes in her way of life that could have helped her more effectively prevent the second, and this time fatal, emotional upheaval that occurred a year later.

    This is in stark contrast to other cancer patients I have worked with where the more complete SPC-PNI approach was followed. The following synopses of the approach taken and results achieved with a number of these patients will give you some idea of the different outcomes that can be expected when a more complete “faith healing” approach is taken towards eliminating the contributing psychological factors (hopelessness, etc.):

    Adele Bucanan: As opposed to just one session with Jolee, I saw Adele once a week for eight weeks. At the time I first saw her, Adele, age 45, was suffering from a fast moving cancer of the spine, lymph glands, the rib cage and the base of the brain – a metastasis from an original cancer of the breast. (At this point in time the only treatment she was undergoing was a very low dosage chemotherapy, as she had had a strong negative reaction to the standard dosage.)

    Because of the extended amount of time with Adele, I was not only able to build up a strong belief in her body’s ability to cure itself of the cancers but through this heightened state of belief I was also able to bring about some major changes in her way of life. In particular, she was able to develop a more assertive personality. This allowed her to break out of the hopeless life situation that had most likely played a key role in making her more susceptible to cancer in the first place. She was now able to stand up to her very dominating and controlling husband. Six months later the cancer had disappeared in all four areas and three years after that, when last contacted, Adele was still very much alive.

    John Roswick: John had been given radiation treatment for cancer of the tongue. However, he refused the recommended follow up radical surgery. At this point he discovered SPC. The following letter was written in August of 1985 upon my request for him to summarize for me what had happened:

    August 5, 1985 Dear Dr. Barrios,

    Almost 6 years ago on Oct 19, 1979 1 was told I had cancer of the tongue and had a year or less to live. I hit the bottom of the pit. I started praying. Knew nothing of God or Jesus, never read the Bible, but I started. I received 35 massive radiation treatments in the neck. I said to the doctors “am I healed”. They said we now have to do surgery. I said What surgery? They were going to take out half my neck. I said no. I contacted you in the summer of 1980. You agreed to see me once a week for 8 or 9 weeks, instructed me on SPC techniques and other counseling on belief and visualization. I used your garden technique and visualizing myself ‘well’ on a mountain top. During my first visit with you, you gave me your book ‘Towards Greater Freedom and Happiness.’ You said: you now have two good books (meaning yours and the Bible) and told me to read them both. I thank God for you and your book, you strengthened my belief in what Jesus said in Mark ll:23 [‘Believe and all things are possible’]

    Dr. Barrios, in my opinion your program is bridging the gap between the mind, and the spirit then the body. Your program SPC was the beginning in my healing, reinforcing my belief in Jesus teachings, ridding myself of all pent up fear, especially fear, guilt, doubts, anger, unforgivness, and a bringing together of the Mind, Spirit and Body.

    My saliva returned to me during my sessions with you, my voice, and I forgot to mention, MY TASTER. [After radiation] I couldn’t taste anything. The doctors said my saliva would never be the same, that my taster, taste buds, would be about 50 to 75% returned. Well today I enjoy full saliva, and full tasting abilities I had before radiation.

    It is sad to note that medical doctors don’t, or won’t advise patients on positive principles laid down in your book or the bible. I would urge anyone who has an illness of any nature to seek out the SPC program. It works. It puts you in tune with the real you, the spirit. It has for me and I know it will for others. I firmly believe you are an instrument of God’s. And I thank him for you. I am not the same person you first met, frightened, confused, oh yes confused! My condition is healed. Your holistic approach is a blessing.”

    Pam Roth: When I first started working on Pam’s case, she had just gone through chemotherapy and radiation for metastatic breast cancer. She was also having great difficulty breaking free of a 30 year two pack a day cigarette habit. The following letter (which she wrote on my behalf when I was nominated in 1996 for the Norman Cousins Award in mind-body health) tells her story:

    June 14, 1996 To Whom It May Concern:

    As CEO of P.J. Roth & Associates and President of The Public Service News Bureau, I have had the honor of knowing Dr. Barrios and observing his work since 1983.

    Through his SPC approach, Dr. Barrios has developed a program that has allowed people worldwide to tap into their own personal power to change their health, their happiness and their lives for the better! He has made the mind/body link accessible and understandable to the world.

    Over the years, I observed the extraordinary development of the clinical applications of his pioneering theories, and his enormous influence on the American public. At the same time, I felt it had little to do with me on a personal level. That is until 1992, when I was diagnosed with metastasic breast cancer. It was then that Dr. Barrios made the mind/body link accessible and understandable to me in the most profound way possible!

    In light of my particular case and my prognosis, my physicians encouraged me to undergo the most strenuous chemotherapy and radiation; which I did.

    At the same time, even faced with my own mortality, I could not summon up the resources to make necessary changes in my personal lifestyle. In many ways this was not surprising, after all, I had previously spent years of therapy unsuccessfully attempting to deal with the underlying lack of self worth that showed itself in an aggressive disregard of and for my own physical and emotional well being.

    Years of therapy, will power and even cancer seemed to make little difference to ending my two pack a day habit and a 30 year addiction to nicotine. None of these could change the stress attached to my particular career choice or the fact that I had never developed necessary care and consideration for my physical “self”. I was in trouble and I knew it. I had tried everything including traditional hypnosis but nothing seemed to work.

    I was depressed, anxious about the cancer that I was sure was still with me, debilitated by my treatment and more out of touch than ever with the body that had betrayed me. It was then that Dr. Barrios stepped back into my life bringing all the benefits of his years of clinical experience in mind-body health.

    Within two sessions, I made the remarkable breakthroughs that years of therapy and prior hypnosis were unable to achieve! And it was all so easy. Dr. Barrios’ approach not only convinced me that I had the power to tap into my own subconscious – it showed me how to use and apply that power to achieve deep seated change.

    Within weeks, through applying these powerful hypnotic and visualization techniques to my cancer and my personal “mind/body” split – I not only stopped smoking once and for all, I was transformed into a person in touch with and caring for her own physical and emotional needs.

    Today, I am a committed ex-smoker, who exercises, eats well and takes care of herself in every way possible. I am also, according to all tests, “cancer free” [still “free” as of December, 2001]. More importantly, I intend to give myself every opportunity to stay that way by continuing to practice the SPC techniques that have made the difference in my recovery.!”

    It should be pointed out that I am not the only one to report such long lasting recoveries from cancer when a more complete “faith healing” approach is taken. In her book, Temoshok cites numerous cases of successful cancer cures brought about by her and other researchers in the field using the more complete healing approach. Take for instance the story of Irwin:

    Diagnosed initially with testicular cancer, the cancer had eventually spread to his lymph nodes, chest and lungs. One tumor on his neck had grown so large he was forced to keep his head at an odd tilt. His doctors told him that even with the best treatment at the time (a combination of surgery, radiation, cobalt and nitrogen mustard, which he did undergo) he had only three to four months to live and that he had zero chance of survival. At this point he sought the help of a psychotherapist who used hypnosis along with traditional psychoanalysis. Under hypnosis he was much more open to healing suggestions aimed at opening up blocks in his capacity to love and be loved and to work on achieving his long term life goals. Within six months, he had resolved his love problems and gotten married and was ordained as an Episcopal priest – a lifelong goal. On the very day he was ordained “he got the news that his follow-up x-rays showed no more evidence of cancer. His lymph nodes and lungs were completely clear. This seeming miracle occurred six months after his original diagnosis…Today, thirty three hears later, Irwin is alive, well and cancer-free.” (Temoshok, 1993, p. 320 italics added).

    It should be pointed out that my presentation of the above anecdotal evidence of cancer cures through a form of faith healing is done more as support for, rather than definitive proof of, the ability to cure cancer by using a mental/spiritual, “faith healing”, approach. For this definitive proof we will need larger, controlled studies. In such studies, among other things, all the important variables can be studied systematically and under scientifically controlled conditions. For instance, such studies would include accurate and more complete measurements of how strong the belief factor was and how complete were the necessary lifestyle changes for each individual case. The latter would I feel help throw light on the question often posed: “How do you explain counter anecdotal cases whereby terminally ill patients have tried to pray for their recovery substantially but to no avail?” One answer to such a question might be that the degree and length of healing would be directly correlated to strength of belief and depth of relevant life changes that took place.

    How Does Prayer Work?

    One other concept related to belief and faith is prayer. Prayer can be defined as a verbal means of delineating the goal you wish to attain with God’s help. For example, the prayer “I pray to God that He will heal me (or you) of this affliction or illness” clearly sets out the goal one wishes to attain. Whether this prayer is answered depends on three things: (1) the strength of the person’s belief (both the person being prayed for and the person doing the praying); (2) the degree to which the individual subsequently incorporates God into his life (i.e., incorporates the guidance factor); and (3) the lawfulness of nature. The latter is important too because prayer should not go against this aspect of God. It would be wiser for someone who has lost a limb, rather than praying for another limb, to pray for the ability to quickly learn how to use an appropriate prosthesis and for the proper state of mind to not feel inferior for having a missing limb, etc.

    However, one should not be too quick to limit prayer for fear that one may be asking too much in the sense of thinking that such a prayer would go against the lawfulness of nature factor. At this point in time we are not yet fully aware of all the laws of nature. It could be that on the surface a prayer may be defying the laws of nature; but it could also be that in the future a law could be discovered to explain the miracle brought about by such a prayer.

    Now, assuming that the goal of the prayer does not go counter to the laws of nature, how do the belief and guidance factors play a role in determining whether a prayer will be answered? As pointed out above in the sections headed “What Is Belief?” and “Is Faith Healing Real?”, belief itself can produce direct effects by amplifying (focusing) the power of thought to affect the body or influence behavior. But as was emphasized in these two sections, in order to sustain the physiological or behavioral changes there has to also be a permanent change in one’s way of life – one’s attitudes, beliefs and life style. In other words, the guidance factor also has to be incorporated.

    There is still the question of whether and how prayer can affect external factors – factors that we do not have contiguous contact with. For example in the case of praying for someone else, contiguous contact would include praying within earshot of that person, or the person listening to you pray over the phone or radio, or hearing that you had prayed for him or her. Non-contiguous contact would mean that the person being prayed for did not consciously know he or she was being prayed for.

    Thus, can praying for someone else’s healing have any effect if the person does not know he/she is being prayed for? Or can praying for rain actually bring about rain? Well, there are two possible ways prayer could affect such external factors – the direct and indirect way. In the case of praying for someone unbeknownst to them, the direct way could involve some form of mental telepathy as a way of reaching the prayed-for-person’s mind. Or in the case of praying for rain, the direct way could invoke some variation of psychokenesis where the mind in a highly focused state could cause droplets of rain to form from the existing moisture in the air – a psychical seeding of rain clouds so to speak. One can see that the lawfulness of nature aspect would be a major factor here. (e.g., are mental telepathy and psychokinesis in tune with the laws of nature?)

    It would seem that the more feasible way of prayer affecting external factors would be the indirect way. For instance, in the case of rain, the prayer could help come up with new ideas for producing rain such as the use of iodine particles for actual seeding of rain clouds or for coming up with the necessary money for seeding, etc. In the case of the possibility of prayer affecting someone who does not know he/she is being prayed for, the prayer could help indirectly by helping the person doing the praying to change in such a way that would have a positive affect on the person being prayed for.

    Is There Life Everlasting?

    Adhering to the lawfulness of nature, we know that all living creatures must die some day even when following a true religion. So does this mean that when we die we can no longer have life?

    There are many who believe in the existence of a soul that continues on after corporal death. Here again, although we may not currently know of any laws of nature to completely support such a contention, it does not mean that such laws do not exist and won’t someday be uncovered. As a for instance: perhaps the soul could continue to exist in the form of a unique pattern of energy that is emitted from the body at the time of death and continues to exist in the universe indefinitely. We know that the live brain does emit electrical waves that can be picked up by EEG machines and we know that at least certain energy waves can exist long after their original source has died (e.g. light, radio and gamma waves existing for billions of years long after an exploding distant sun has died). Could it be then that the soul continues to exist after death in the form of some unique pattern of (electrical or some other type of) energy?

    But even if the above hypothesis is off, there are currently at least three ways that we know for sure one can live on after death: For one, we know that the molecules that make up our bodies continue to exist after we die. They continue to be active and, if allowed to, will reformulate eventually with other living things. I say “if allowed to” because there are some forms of burial that can interfere with the reintegration with other living matter – such as entombment in a mausoleum.

    A second way of living on would be through our progeny – our genes being passed on from generation to generation.

    And finally, we can live on in the thoughts of others. The more people we have affected and the more deeply, the longer this form of immortality will last. This, by the way, is one way of interpreting the resurrection of Christ, one that would not be in conflict with the lawfulness of nature. He most certainly influenced and continues to influence deeply a great many people to where, 2000 years later, He is still very much alive in the thoughts of many.

    This question of whether there is an afterlife is particularly important for those who look forward to an afterlife in heaven, especially those who seem to be struggling miserably through life. The problem is that the latter group might decide to put all their hope in this heavenly afterlife and give up too soon as far as getting anything out of this life. It seems to me that it would be much wiser to work as hard as possible at following God’s way in this life so as to be more likely to achieve both heaven on earth as well as after. It seems logical that if heaven after corporal death does exist, you are more likely to enter it if you have followed God’s way while still on earth – by living life to the fullest.


    Barrios, A.A. (1985). Towards Greater Freedom and Happiness. LosAngeles:SPC Press. Barrios, A.A. A (2001) Theory of hypnosis Based on Principles of Conditioningand Inhibition, Contemporary Hypnosis, Fall, 2001. Benson, H. Timeless Healing: The Power and Biology of Belief. Simonand Schuster, 1996. Cousins, N. (1989). Head First: The Biology of Hope. New York: E.P. Dutton. Donin, H.H. To Be a Jew: A Guide to Jewish Observance in Contemporary Life. Basic Books, 1991. Friedman, M & Rosenmann, R.H. (1974). Type A Behavior and Your Heart. New York: Fawcet Columbine Books. Hernandez-Peon, R. Centrifugal control of sensory inflow to the brain Acta Neurelogica Latinoamericana, 1960, 6, 32-42. John 10:10. (1996). The Holy Bible: New International Version. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Bible Publishers. John 14:6 (1996) The Holy Bible: New International Version. Grand Rapids, Michigan; Zondervan Bible Publishers. Kroger, W.S. Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis. Philadelphia: Lipponcott, 1977. Levine, J.D. et al: The mechanism of placebo analgesia. Lancet 2: 654-657, 1978. Lindzey, G. (ed.) Handbook of Social Psychology. Vol. 1: Theory and Method. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1954 Mowrer, O.H. (1960). Learning Theory And The Symbolic Processes. John Wiley and Sons. 1960. Nash, M. Article on addiction (section on neural imaging of dopamine rise linked to euphoria) Time Magazine, May 5, 1997 Pavlov, I.P. (1960). Conditioned Reflexes. (Re-issue of 1927 edit.) New York: Dover. Skinner, B.F. (1957). Verbal Behavior. Appleton-Century-Crofts. Temoshok, L. & Dreher, H. (1993). The Type C Connection. New York: Random House.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s