I went to use Google docs in the first time in forever, finding some old philosophy papers.
Ever wonder what a philosopher does? No? That's completely expected.
Regardless, here's an eight page paper of me disproving -- for some value of disprove -- prayer.
Despite that inflammatory idea, you'll quickly be bored. Paul may be an exception, and I will always love him for it.
Though, the text aside, he's the basic formulation of the argument. In truth, looking back it needs to be reworked, but I expect nothing less from 6-year-ago-me. The wording is really specific for a bunch of reasons.
1. If God exists, he is omnipotent, omniscient and omni-benevolent
2. Any omnipotent, omniscient and omni-benevolent being could not (or would
not) allow unnecessary suffering to exist.
3. If no unnecessary suffering exists, then it is the best of all possible worlds.
4. If God exists, then this is the best of all possible worlds (1,2,3)
5. If a person believes God exists, then they must also accept that this is the best
of all possible worlds (4)
6. Unless God ceases to exist, or somehow loses his properties, then he will be
only be able to allow any world that exists to be the best of all possible
7. To a person who believes in a God, this must be the best of all possible worlds (5)
8. If God exists, then this is the best of all possible worlds, and it cannot
logically be any other way, as long as God continues to exist (6)
9. Petitionary prayer is intended to change the world
10. Petitionary prayer cannot impart any change upon the world if God exists (8, 9)
11. If an act cannot inflict a change upon the world, then it is cannot be said
12. Petitionary prayer cannot accomplish anything. (10, 11)