Placeboby
meyersComment by purpleflutterby13: I love the idea. Technically - it's a shame you cut off the woody's toe, and I think there might be a tad too much negative space at the top (even though it does work with the message of the image, but I'd maybe cut off slightly more).
Hmm, yes, I see how this might offend the more religious... It genuinely took me a minute to figure out why it would offend anyone.
The bits of spirituality I can personally make sense of do not involve interventionist deities. And I don't think I that makes me that different from a lot of Christians. And the argument goes as follows:
The definition of a placebo is something like 'a substance that has no physical effect, but is given to patients because the belief in it helps them heal.' Now, this is still compatible with a religious person's point of view. The prayer doesn't have to have a physical effect, rather, it's the power of belief that helps people heal. I don't think that's a radical statement. Maybe some people do believe that God physically alters their body and heals them when they pray to him, and they would indeed be offended, but I would've thought the bulk of religious people were less literal-minded, and willing to concede that prayer and belief works in a more roundabout way than that - it's the belief rather than a genuine physical interaction that makes it work. Therefore it's a classic placebo, whether God exists or not.
Hmm, except I suppose it does depend on your starting definition of a placebo. But starting with the one above, the photo is only really countering the beliefs of a minority (people who believe in an interventionist god), and even then should be considered insightful rather than hateful - it could be used as a starting point for a discussion on the nature of God. Does God literally help you? Or does he help you help yourself?
But then, as an atheist scientist, I'm gonna say that...
Photographer found comment helpful.
