Comment Does this mean it's really dead? (Score 4, Funny) 245
...Maybe not.
I am not sure we read the same article. Not to invoke an argument, but the TFA talks about listening to sermons and reading the bible. It even ends with '“My personal belief is that having a strong belief is key to getting the benefits,” Fotuhi said.'
Right or wrong, the article says what it says.. The fact that you missed this would suggest you may need to check your confirmation bias filters a bit.
In response to:
The Discovery article makes it pretty clear towards the end that it is not religious belief, but religious activities, that are likely responsible for the cognitive benefits.
And now, you again:
as I noted elsewhere, I see his (and probably yours) point
But I thought the article says what it says? Was it in fact you who missed something due to your confirmation bias filters?
As you can see, you've now said yourself that you were wrong earlier. I hope you can begin to understand where you went wrong, and why it was not the best move to insist that your opinion, as you must clearly see it is, doesn't make anyone else wrong at all. Also, it's funny that after several posts of not making a single point in support of your argument, you've come around and now agree with me while still acting like I'm wrong, and you are attacking my "debating style." Very amusing! You've done a great job of helping me kill time in the slow parts of my Saturday. Good day to you as well, my very confused friend!
Ok. I am not one of those people who needs to be right all the time, nor am I someone who needs to prove it. It is my considered opinion that both the OP's interpretation and yours ignore the bias completely for most likely the reason given, but that is neither here nor there. I am going to leave it as this.
If that isn't an attempt to walk away while doing your damndest to sound like you must be right, I don't know what is. Look, if you think I'm the one biased here, you aren't paying attention. I'm saying the article doesn't say one way or the other, it only gives opinions. I'm not even saying religion is definitely not a necessary part of it, all I'm saying is you're wrong to call his interpretation wrong. Nothing you've said at any point has helped your argument, all you've done is insist that because the author has an opinion that walking away from the article interpreting it any other way is wrong. You're quite simply the only one here who is wrong, you can shout "I'm right!" all you want, but you can't actually support your argument because you're wrong. You've gone ahead and quoted me instead of the article, and with quotes that do nothing to suggest you're right, only that you still can't see the difference between opinions and facts in an article. That, honestly, is the only way to interpret your way, if you can't separate opinions from fact. If you look at the facts presented in the article, none of them say religion or belief is actually a necessary part of it.
It's good you don't need to be right all the time and prove it, because you are wrong and have failed on every level to prove otherwise at all.
"I've seen it. It's rubbish." -- Marvin the Paranoid Android