Demons don't exist, and their mythical properties are ascribed to real addictions. Addictions may not be incurable, they may not be uncontrollable, they may not require exorcism by an expert, they may not have been induced by sin or fed by it, Jesus may not be the answer, etc.
edit: really? Happy to accept the downvotes on this one.
Agreed. Historically this "evil spirit" metaphor has been a symbol used to deny accountabilty for everything from battery to rape and murder. It also includes religious baggage.
A homunculus didn't do it; I am it and I did that.
I've seen some ministries report a 50% success rate re curing addiction for people who join. So social recovery forms of drug treatment are very successful and might include things like exorcism and whatnot as part of belonging to the flock, I suppose.
Sure, we know from science and Occam's razor that devils and gods probably don't exist, but that doesn't mean participating doesn't show proven benefits. Although the studies that show the benefits of religion tend to find attendance means more than believe, so it is more of a network and support effect than anything actually spiritual.
> I've seen some ministries report a 50% success rate re curing addiction for people who join.
Ministries are not known for their careful scientific rigor in defining and measuring success rates. That 50% could be coming from any of a number of biases ranging from blatant to subtle: "How to have a high success rate in treatment: advice for evaluators of alcoholism programs", Miller & Sanchez-Craig 1996 http://slatestarcodex.com/Stuff/addiction.pdf is a semi-humorous paper from some frustrated researchers describing how these bogus numbers come about (discussion: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/01/02/two-dark-side-statistic... ).
The problem with using Occam's razor to disprove the existence of some sort of god or spirit of the universe is that there isn't any explanation. Remember it's "the simplest explanation is usual correct." We really don't have any explanation, ultimately as to origins or what is really happening at a fundamental level. What are photons? What are electrons? What is space-time? This pesky big bang thing. And then you have Goedel's incompleteness theorems which basically tell us that no amount of math or logic will ever fully explain this universe. While there may not be some old fella with a big white beard floating around in the upper reaches of the atmosphere, I tend to think the actual "truth" is far crazier.
BTW, I feel like I always come across as a crazy person when I say this stuff but I really don't see a flaw in this. The basic premise is that there isn't going to be a logical explanation of "the universe." So, that seems to lead to the conclusion that any complete explanation will have to contain some illogical portion. I feel like once you accept that, all bets are off as far as feeling comfortable in our cozy little science bubbles.
edit: and everything that you said is true. Don't be discouraged by the downvotes. People are downvoting facts that they don't that don't accord with with their prejudices, rather than people participating in bad faith or spreading misinformation.
