<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Religion: The best placebo?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.centertao.org/blog/2009/03/13/religion-the-best-placebo/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.centertao.org/blog/2009/03/13/religion-the-best-placebo/</link>
	<description>taoism, taoist thought, buddha, yoga, tai chi, shakuhachi,</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:38:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: carl</title>
		<link>http://www.centertao.org/blog/2009/03/13/religion-the-best-placebo/comment-page-1/#comment-222</link>
		<dc:creator>carl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:43:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.centertao.org/?p=2336#comment-222</guid>
		<description>Hey Neighbor,

I wonder whether expectations are really Pavlovian, especially as it relates to religion. Pavlovian is more about a dog&#039;s (or human&#039;s) response to stimuli. The placebo effect of religion doesn&#039;t hinge on this, unless you regard our constant life long underlying sense of &#039;weirdness&#039; to be the stimuli. Religion steadies that sense of &#039;weirdness&#039;, at least somewhat through ideals / expectations which the belief embodies. 

It is all subconscious. Biology hoodwinks us into behaviors; we are mostly unaware of the biological strings pulling us to and fro. In other words, life feels &#039;real&#039;.

To be sure, the Pavlovian and Skinnerian conditioning may play superficial roles in this. I suppose the &quot;new here&quot; lies in the role language and thought play in this.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Neighbor,</p>
<p>I wonder whether expectations are really Pavlovian, especially as it relates to religion. Pavlovian is more about a dog&#8217;s (or human&#8217;s) response to stimuli. The placebo effect of religion doesn&#8217;t hinge on this, unless you regard our constant life long underlying sense of &#8216;weirdness&#8217; to be the stimuli. Religion steadies that sense of &#8216;weirdness&#8217;, at least somewhat through ideals / expectations which the belief embodies. </p>
<p>It is all subconscious. Biology hoodwinks us into behaviors; we are mostly unaware of the biological strings pulling us to and fro. In other words, life feels &#8216;real&#8217;.</p>
<p>To be sure, the Pavlovian and Skinnerian conditioning may play superficial roles in this. I suppose the &#8220;new here&#8221; lies in the role language and thought play in this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neighbor Andy</title>
		<link>http://www.centertao.org/blog/2009/03/13/religion-the-best-placebo/comment-page-1/#comment-221</link>
		<dc:creator>Neighbor Andy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:31:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.centertao.org/?p=2336#comment-221</guid>
		<description>1. Brain imaging mostly tells us what we already know for other reasons.

2. The connections you make between religion and expectation and placebo and etc. are classical (Pavlovian) conditioning with a little operant (Skinnerian) conditioning thrown in.

3. These connections can be subconscious.

4. What&#039;s new here?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1. Brain imaging mostly tells us what we already know for other reasons.</p>
<p>2. The connections you make between religion and expectation and placebo and etc. are classical (Pavlovian) conditioning with a little operant (Skinnerian) conditioning thrown in.</p>
<p>3. These connections can be subconscious.</p>
<p>4. What&#8217;s new here?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

