House — Episode 15 (Season 5): “Unfaithful”
This episode of House started off great with an intriguing medical mystery, but over the course of an hour it degenerated into a barely mediocre episode.
Daniel Bresson is a burned out alcoholic priest currently working at a small inner city church. After he shuts the sanctuary for the night, he retires to his dingy one-room apartment and proceeds to drink and smoke the night away. A few drinks later, he hears a knock on the door and angrily gets up to answer it, only to discover that waiting at the door for him is Jesus, stigmata present, floating a foot of the ground. The next time we see Daniel he is at the Princeton Plainsboro ER. Cameron has decided he is probably just suffering from alcohol abuse or exhaustion, and is surprised when House decides to take the case and admit the patient. It turns out that House doesn’t think Daniel has anything significantly wrong with him either, he is just looking for a “fake patient” to prove a point to Foreman and Thirteen.
After informing his team about Daniel’s admission, House suggests psychomotor epilepsy (an older term for temporal lobe epilepsy, particularly the complex partial seizure variety), atropine toxicity, or a frontal lobe tumor as possible causes of the hallucination. Taub suspects it was the alcohol. House orders an EEG, a head CT, and a search of Daniel’s apartment. The EEG and CT are normal. The apartment search takes a while to finally get started, but reveals nothing as well. While performing the tests, Taub and Kutner learn that Daniel has been transferred around different churches across the nation because a teenager once accused him of “inappropriate contact.” Daniel swears he is innocent, but Taub thinks he is lying and suggests that his symptoms may be caused by syphilis.
As Kutner and Taub get ready to discharge the patient — as they could find nothing wrong with him — he mentions that he is feeling nauseated and his left foot is numb. Examining the foot, Kutner discovers that one of Daniel’s toes has turned black and fallen off. House now suggests leprosy, ergotism, or carbon monoxide poisoning. He seems to favor the latter and orders a carbon monoxide blood level, as well as starting Daniel in a hyperbaric chamber. While in the chamber, he begins to feel a crushing chest pain and the team is suspicious he may have had a heart attack, but the EKG is normal. House proposes that Daniel may have a clotting disorder and orders what seems to be an entire body angiogram to look for clots. None are seen, but the team discovers that Daniel has large areas of his body that are entirely numb. Daniel also takes this moment to mention that he has become blind in his right eye. House now believes his problem to be a neurological one. Autoimmune is mentioned (particularly Guillain-Barre) as a possible diagnosis, as are tumors and infection. House then dives into a metaphor about Duran Duran as his way of suggesting that the problem probably lies in the patient’s spleen. He orders a spleen biopsy. The results are normal, except for “insignificant traces of minor bugs.” One of these bugs turns out to be Pneumocystis, which is only seen in patients with a compromised immune system. The team suspect AIDS. Daniel refuses an HIV test, informing the doctors that he knows he cannot have AIDS as he does not have any of the risk factors. After some arguments among the team, House decides to start him on HIV therapy regardless.
As Kutner is hanging the medicine, Daniel’s condition begins to deteriorate. His blood pressure climbs, he begins to feel flushed, and a rash breaks out on his chest. The differential now consists of a reaction to the HIV medication, hyper IgE syndrome, another genetic syndrome, or cerebral microtumors (tumors too small to show up on standard scans). Genetic testing is ordered to look for the cause of his symptoms. House has his weekly Eureka! moment while talking with Wilson. He realizes that the hallucination that brought Daniel to the hospital in the first place was alcohol induced — and after excluding that, the remaining symptoms lead him to conclude that Daniel is suffering from Wiskott-Aldrich Syndrome, an inherited disease.
As usual, major complaints are in red, minor in blue, nit-picking in green:
This is the first episode in quite a while where House himself is suggesting most of the differential diagnoses — and he’s not very good at it (at least in this episode). The vast majority of his diagnoses — including the final one — require tremendous leaps of logic and the ability to gloss over inconvenient symptoms that don’t fit.
Taub can rule out pneumonia, pleurisy and an embolus just by fluoroscope? The pneumonia I can accept, but pleurisy doesn’t show up on a scan like that, and how could he rule out a clot since they only rarely show up on x-rays, and Kutner hadn’t even started injecting the dye yet?
If the patient had low white count, I wouldn’t think of the spleen first thing, or even second or third. There are other more likely causes that don’t require a risky and likely uninformative spleen biopsy.
Traces of other diseases (&ldquomild bugs”) can be found in the spleen? Really, how is that? And they can be easily tested? (Unless they are somehow referring to antibody memory cells.)
Now, assuming for a moment Thirteen is correct, Pneumocystis is a very common germ. Pretty much everyone has come in contact with it and their immune system has easily fought it off. (It only becomes a problem in people with low immune systems.) Bear in mind that even these healthy people would show “insignificant traces” of a minor bug so the test tells us nothing, certainly not that the patient has AIDS
Is House suggesting the team test for every genetic disorder?
Non-medical nitpicks:
They move the priest back to the same city as his alleged victim?
Foreman’s job hunt — even with a letter of recommendation — didn’t go so well last time. That’s why he ended up working under House again.
The medical mystery was good. It started off well, even if it was a fake out, and maintained interest through the episode. It earns a B+. The final diagnosis was quite a stretch, Wiskott-Aldrich appearing suddenly in 29 year-old who had been previously healthy? Maybe a family history would have been a nice thing to obtain. I give the solution a C-. The same for the medicine (C-) which required too much coincidence and skipping over symptoms. The soap opera was good on every front and deserves an A-.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:02 pm
As a note the subtitles listed the song House was playing at the end as “Cuddy’s Seranade” by Hugh Laurie with a few bars labeled as the Stone’s “You Can’t Always Get What You Want.”
February 16th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
I knew that Foreteen were snowing House, but I really hoped I was wrong and that was actually going to be the end of that.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:06 pm
To be fair, the medicine requiring too much coincidence is in line with the theme of the episode. I’m not sure if the writers are operating on that level, but there you go.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:56 pm
I definitely agree with the random jumping. House leapt all over the place, and even though I’m not a doctor, I knew that more than a handful of his ideas were loosely related at best. And I’m glad to know that I wasn’t insane for being suspicious of the magical powers of the spleen to tell us that the patient had AIDS.
I also agree that the soap opera was surprisingly good this week. I had no hopes at all, but I liked the patient and was thrilled by a few amazing zingers that the show had been recently lacking.
I’d say this is a pretty good sign, but the previews for next week don’t look good. House is sick again for reasons he’s hiding? My god, what an inventive idea that they have never before used.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Scott, another great review & a middling episode at best. I had a bunch of problems with this (sudden) onset of WAS:
– no bleeding symptoms at all? I thought that was the key symptom. And the blood work showed none of the disease’s platelet damage?
– the toe suddenly blackening & falling off within a couple hours of entering the hospital doesn’t fit as a symptom of lifelong genetic disorder at all! That’s more like a symptom of extreme frostbite.
- Most seriously, House announces with relief that “you’re not doing to die”. But WAS is serious, isn’t it? Don’t patients tend to die anyway from this before long? I believe bone marrow transplant is pretty much the only possible (but hardly certain) cure.
Scott, am I missing something?
February 17th, 2009 at 12:01 am
Well the shovel metaphor made me laugh….
Kutner said the IgE levels were normal, With Wiskott-Alrich syndrome arent they usually elevated?
Or so Wikipedia MD would have me believe….
February 17th, 2009 at 12:34 am
“Paging Dr. Cameron… You failed to notice the patient’s dead toe during the initial ER exam!” Sometimes I have to wonder if this ER crew would notice an alien hatching clawing out of a patient’s skin. This is another wild oversight in that department. She was going to discharge him!
February 17th, 2009 at 12:35 am
“She’s trying to play me. If we let her succeed, the terrorists win.”
That arrow definitely goes into my quiver.
Not medically relevant: I wish the writers would have sh!tcanned Fourteen. We were oh so god close, and then… the terrorists won, I guess.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:41 am
Are Rupert Murdoch and his buddies in the Religious Right at work here? Can’t we see House’s atheism as a rational response to a scientific education and leave it at that without all the implications…from Cuddy, from Wilson, from the very plot itself (were we supposed to nod our heads knowingly when the patient found God again because there were “too many coincidences?”) that it’s sad?
The writers have toyed with the “House v God” notion several times, but House (as a metaphor for science) has always decidedly prevailed. The look on Laurie’s face as he contemplates this case was not triumphant…his leaning on the cane was a victory to the theists.
I have been annoyed in the past with some of the unrealistic medicine in this show, but I’ve always appreciated the premise. I don’t look on House as a tragic character because of his drug addiction and social rebellion; I consider his character flaws exaggerrated for dramatic effect. House is realistic in that he comes to conclusions based on science (although in that respect the writing is flawed sometimes), never allowing the idea of supernatural forces to interfere with his reasoning. This episode implants the contaminant of religiosity into a rational mind and asks the viewer to rejoice in it. I am utterly disgusted.
This episode may be the last one I watch.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:44 am
Cheers Kate.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:51 am
Stop overanalyzing and enjoy it for the entertainment value.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:56 am
I think Ryan lived in Manhattan and Taub traveled there to tell him about the AIDS diagnosis (PS–does that pointed breach of ethics get no follow-through?) — the priest now lives in Trenton, NJ.
As for the traces of pneumocystis, the way I understood it was that 13 wrote it off as normal (as you say it would be in an ordinary patient) until Taub realized that the priest’s symptoms could be explained by a compromised immune system being attacked by that ‘ordinary’ bug. Of course, having no medical background whatsoever I have no idea whether that’s plausible, either!
The shovel picture…a nice touch.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:04 am
The shovel was a very good touch indeed. Well done.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:07 am
Yeah, Kate, it was pretty annoying, I guess. Maybe. I dunno, I’m an atheist but I’m not above debating religion fairly, so I find these little battles between faith and logic interesting. I’d say the past few episodes have had some decent writing, including this one, after a long streak of episodes that did nothing but remind me that I’m watching TV. This won’t be the last House episode I watch — I want to see how long this streak of halfway decent writing will last.
And for those who think the latest episodes haven’t had such great writing, look back on 501 to 511. Each episode had a progressively stronger stench of angsty melodrama, culminating with an emo high-school girl’s death and the finding of her baby and everything that was supposed to make you cry but made you vomit instead.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:00 am
I too was bothered by the implication that House was wrong to be so rational this time. It was almost like House was admitting that maybe God sent the vision to get him to go to the hospital or something. It’s always kinda bothered me when when they made it seem that House’s atheism came from being blinded by science, but this time it was pretty strong. I did however really like his reworking of Marx. I’ve never heard that “placebo of the masses” line before.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:07 am
I consider myself agnostic, because although I doubt the existence of a
God, I feel that it is just as much an act of faith to be 100% sure there is no God as it is to be 100% sure of God’s existence. That said, I have to say I think House does a better job than most shows of playing the fence. Every other time there has been a House vs. God episode, House has won. I’d call this one more of a draw, rather than a victory for God. But even if you disagree with that, House is still a bit ahead. One incidence of coincidence/redemption does not a bible-thumping shark jump make.
But I digress.
I am loving the House/Cuddy soap opera. I honestly don’t know if I want them to end up together or not. I think the writers have done an excellent job making that interaction into something that would pass for realistic, given House’s social insanity.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:22 am
Im with Kate. Also i think it was a HORRIBLE. episode.
February 17th, 2009 at 4:23 am
Ah, you can say it is very nice the discussion between House X God, and for some theists, like me, we always had to swallow bad comments, disrespect and blasfemy against God, and still continued watching house because of the medical factor and the nice show. Now, stop wacthing it just because FOR ONCE the episode had some tendency for God’s side is really childish behaviour, after all, House still explained the case by himself in the end…
But I can’t change someone’s mind, just wanted to leave a msg and say that sometimes we have to “swallow” it.
I still like House, and the more I watch the more I want to know about the Soap Opera that will follow (and the medical mysteries, of course). By the way, does anyone know off the record what will change House’s life forever (as it was released on a synopsis)?
February 17th, 2009 at 4:49 am
I liked the Jewish baby naming. It was really lovely. I always forget that House is just a made-up character & I really just want him to be happy (and go to the ceremony for Cuddy’s sake), but then I remember he’s kinda just a sociopath.
And he stops breathing next week? Did he move on to harder opiates & get some respiratory depression? oooOOoooh I’m so excited!
February 17th, 2009 at 5:19 am
Actually, I liked the dynamic of the dyed-in-the-wool atheist, House, versus the priest who has lost his faith but may be getting it back again; it’s much more engaging than having a believer and a non-believer simply shouting at each other, “I”m right and you’re wrong.”
But another interesting dynamic at work in this episode was the way people kept assuming they knew what the other person wanted – the whole baby-naming subplot and, of course, Foreman and Thirteen. Can’t anyone simply say what they really mean or really want and be done with it?
My big medical-related question: When the priest lost his sight, did it stay lost until they figured out what was wrong with him? For someone who couldn’t see, the actor/character sure acted like he could. Or was the blindness only temporary?
February 17th, 2009 at 5:20 am
Gabriela… I shalt smite him!
February 17th, 2009 at 5:22 am
It’s not really JUST about House vs. God. It’s about House continually being faced with the reality that he does not and can not know everything for sure in a black and white fashion. It shows his humanity and the temptation to give in to something intangible. It’s not important that it’s a judeo-christian deity that is the intangible as much as that House sees or feels something irrational that he can’t compartmentalize.
February 17th, 2009 at 5:45 am
Hi Scot! It”s been coming for a while, but I am really getting to the point where I like your reviews better than I like the show. Thanks for your good work.
Even without working in the medical field, I feel the medical drama is getting more and more diluted and reworking some themes into the mundane. I am getting quite tired of the House vs God theme. And last night, besides being treated in the medical part, it was also acted out in the soap to ridiculous high in the dragging soap between House and Cuddy. Give it a break for Pete’s sake.
After having been an unconditional fan for the first three seasons, which made me bear with seasons 4 and 5 where I was often disappointed, it also crossed my mind that this might be the last House episode I’d watch… but the trailer intrigued me.
February 17th, 2009 at 6:34 am
Watching the final scene, where House is playing the music that sets the scene for the triumphs of secular humanist Jewishness and true love, I decided that House IS God, but that his is rather a lonely and discouraging position to be in. If he participated in the fun, he would not have the distance needed to orchestrate it. (In this he is like the priest, but unlike him, House tends to be in charge of his own life not a passive, innocent victim, except for that thigh wound.)
NB I understand Cuddy’s position and though it may have to do with religion, it has nothing to do with belief in God. My son married a Jewish woman and they had to have a good Jewish wedding–but it was a challenge to find someone to perform it who would agree not to mention the deity (in English, at least–Adonai was still there in Hebrew) during the ceremony. It was a beautiful ceremony, full of historic significance (up to the readings, which included the recent Massachusetts law stating that marriage is a great good) and a sense of communal support.
February 17th, 2009 at 7:43 am
I’m rather displeased with the most recent episodes, mainly due to their obvious lack of regard for medicine, and overt affinity to soap opera; something that they were much more balanced with in earlier seasons. I watch House for the medicine, the soap opera aspect of it is not really all that interesting to me, so if they keep this up, I’ll be rather displeased, and probably just stop watching. It’ll be a shame, though.
February 17th, 2009 at 7:44 am
No comments yet on Foreman and Thirteen tricking House into thinking they had broken up so they could both keep their jobs? My initial response to that was “How long will this last?” Either House already knows they were playing him, or he’ll figure it out soon enough.
February 17th, 2009 at 7:50 am
I really appreciated the hockey reference in the first scene.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Re: The many references in the comments to “House v. God.” I noticed a passing reference by House himself to “House of God.” That’s the title of a comically cynical novel written by a doctor based on his experiences in medical residency. It has become a cult classic among physicians. If you like the humor of “House” (the character and the show) and are looking for something interesting and entertaining to read, you will enjoy this book.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:05 am
I did not get the DuranDuran-Spleen metaphor House was so proud of. Can somebody explain it? What does the spleen do in general?
February 17th, 2009 at 8:18 am
Who could tell me what the shovel metaphor mean?
I come from China, and I don’t quite understand…
Thank you very much…
February 17th, 2009 at 8:34 am
OK, I’m not understanding why people are so angry at the “religious” nature and why some people are saying that this is the last episode that they’ll watch because religion “won.” A reason might be because I’m a Christian, but I agree with the above poster who said that it takes as much of a leap of faith to say there is no God than to say “I don’t know.”
Now, maybe because I was bored with this episode (I just wasn’t in the mood for it), but I didn’t get the feeling that religion really won. I ended up flipping through the channels, so it’s very possible I didn’t see what everybody else saw.
But I disagree with House–you can practice your religion, be proud of your heritage, without going to extremes with it… the “All or nothing” approach doesn’t really work when it comes to religion. Otherwise you get extremists. There’s middle ground everywhere. At least, that’s what I believe. And most people do find middle ground.
That doesn’t make me right or wrong. That’s just an opinion. Just like it’s some of your opinions that science has to win the day every day.
Maybe we all should just repeat the Mystery Science Theater 3000 motto to ourselves regarding this: Repeat to yourself “This is just a show, I should really just relax.”
Kat
February 17th, 2009 at 9:04 am
Also, the closed captions listed the piece that House was playing at the end as “Cuddy’s Serenade.” Does anyone know if that’s an original piece by Hugh Laurie? If it is, it’s beautiful. If it’s not, well, it’s still beautiful. I’d just love it to be an original Hugh Laurie piece.
I’m beginning to think that Hugh Laurie is too talented for this show.
Kat
February 17th, 2009 at 9:04 am
[...] Polite Dissent has got a recap of the medical part of the episode last night – he tends to agree with me, that it wasn’t the best episode, either medically or dramatically. What did you think of last nights episode? How can the writers fix the show?! Did You Enjoy this Post? Subscribe to Watching House. It’s Free! « Back Home Posted in Announcements on February 17th, 2009 Link to this Entry Email This Entry [...]
February 17th, 2009 at 9:13 am
Hi, as always, an enjoyable review & comments. If anyone is interested in more on the House vs. God showdown, you might want to check out an article I wrote on the show for Religion in the News magazine…here is the link:
http://www.trincoll.edu/depts/csrpl/RINVol11No1/PlayingGodless.htm
February 17th, 2009 at 9:17 am
Wow, I guess for some commenters, anything short of the Priest renouncing his faith and actually being a child molester equates to the episode being a Rupert Murdoch ploy to turn us all into religious fanatics. Seriously, some of you guys are just as judgemental and close-minded as Taub, and so I suspect you miss about as much as that character does. Just dismiss the hypocritical drunk religious pedophiles, and move on.
And then the drama, “This is my last episode”. Really? The rest of us will hope so, but I doubt you are serious.
I thought the episode was bad, but because of the character story line. Foreman is fired for his mistakes, and denied a letter of recommendation. Yet Taub gets away with breaking HIPPA laws? And even though I recognize the old House saw, “everybody lies”; I can’t believe that House proscribes the AIDs treatment with a patient providing a history that suggests it is improbable. I guess the Priest allowed the treatment (odd he would refuse a test but accept the treatment), otherwise I think House and Taub committed assault. They certainly caused him unnecessary pain and suffering.
On another note, the steady cam operator is anything but steady. The spleen biopsy scene looked like it was filmed during one of those NJ earthquakes.
That said, I’ll watch the show next week, because it is still a very good show with great lines. Indeed, I think its been awhile, since we had so many good one-liners in an episode. And I don’t know if Cuddy wanted House to be there or not, or if House really wanted to go. That is an interesting story line to me, since I don’t know what keeps Wilson and Cuddy from getting together. Good soap opera there.
February 17th, 2009 at 9:18 am
John H: I think House was playing *them*. He provoked their actions in a deliberate attempt to restore the effectiveness of the team.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:34 am
Have to agree with what Lusus said, I couldn’t say it differently myself. It’s not so much theism vs atheism as it is House vs. things we don’t know yet. As a plot device it’s easy to use because one can’t refute the intangible, whereas if it was another doctor who came up with a solution we could poke holes in what we saw as flaws in their diagnosing. I like to think of it as House vs. random acts of reality that occur, rather than attributing to a cohesive intelligence at work.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:53 am
Maybe my memory is off – didn’t Cuddy hire Foreman? I thought House wasn’t allowed to fire him.
Another House vs. God episode, with basically the exact same conclusion. They need new writers. I’m glad they’re using a whiteboard and building up symptoms again, though.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:58 am
Argh, Isaac, you beat me to it! I was going to mention the same thing.
Also, why wouldn’t Cuddy give Foreman a letter of recommendation? He has done nothing worse that some of the stuff House has done over time. That was pretty lame.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:03 am
“Unfaithful” will prove to be one of the more impotant episodes in the series. In this episode, House for the first time appears to concede that truth extends beyond mere rationalism. He came to the correct diagnosis only after removing hallucination as a symptom on the basis of this concession, tacitly admitting the possibility that the priest experienced a authentic private revelation of the crucified Christ (”truth is truth,” said House, in response to Wilson’s admonition against consideration of possible metaphysical reality). House’s half-hearted rationalization of the priest’s experience underscrores the tacit admission. “Unfaithful” is a thoughful reconsideration of “House vs. God” (much like the reconsideration of “One Day, One Room” in “Fetal Position”). Ironically, the unfaithfulness alluded to in the episode’s title may in good measure relate to House’s waivering faith in rationalism.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:27 am
I must have blinked again. Has Cuddy adopted the baby? She must have. I can’t imagine she would have any sort of religious baby naming ceremony for a baby that was just in her foster care.
If I were Foreman and the only job I could ever get was with House I would go a little crazy. Wouldn’t he be able to get a job somewhere…maybe under someone’s supervision for a couple of years?
Has House done this bit before where he removes one item from the white board and looks at the possibilities then? I think he might have, but I liked it. Maybe just because it mirrors real life.
House seems to be backing down in his encounters with Cuddy last week and this week. Interesting. He had a fairly long relationship once before and seeing him give in to her makes me wonder if he couldn’t make it work again with Cuddy.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:46 am
Schumpeter Fan: I think I agree with you, but I’m curious, did you mean to say this will be one of the more “important” episodes in the series, or one of the more “impotent” episodes? The actual word you used is halfway between the two.
Also, I don’t think House actually decided that the sighting of Jesus was not a hallucination, but that it was explained by the priest being drunk. Once he quit trying to find one disease that explained all the symptoms, it became obvious.
Having said that, as a Christian, I would like nothing better than to see House “come to Jesus” one of these days after all those years of living by pure rationalism and unabashed atheism. Sometimes those who most vehemently deny God’s existence experience the most dramatic and powerful conversions.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:47 am
I didn’t like the episode either, the only good thing is Cameron – in contrast to the entire show’s development her character development is amazing. BTW newsflash to Jay: I take it you never worked in an ER, it’s the way it works, you don’t have the time to examine a patient’s toe when he’s obivously just drunk.
Huddy gets more and more annoying (never been a fan of Huddy romance anyway, on the contrary), can’t they just get it over with and done? This kindergarten is highly ridiculous. Wilson’s getting annoying to, like some sort of misleaded matchmaker. I’d love to see HIM with Cuddy, he’s so wonderful with her and the baby, and he’d deserved happiness after that disaster with Amber.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
John: I meant “important”. Please excuse the typo.
As for House’s effort to explain the priest’s experiece, it seemed to have been delivered more as a rationalization than an explanation (it seemed that House was deeplly unsure of his rationalization, a moment set up earlier in the episode when it was learned that the priest was an experienced drinker who had had only a few drinks before his encounter). The important thing is not whether House concluded without doubt that the priest actually experienced an authentic private revelation, but that he admitted the posibility of truth beyond rationalism. House may be in the process of transforming from a rationalist gadfly into an exemplar of the age old quest for truth in the mold of St. Augustine.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
What an amazing episode. The show keeps getting better and better.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Schumpeter Fan: I understand, and I hope you’re right. Maybe the stage is set for House’s own private revelation in a “near-death” experience next week? (I know – they’ve already done that in the episode where House electrocutes himself with the patient’s pocket knife…not to mention his being shot, and the bus crash, etc.) Getting close to the end of the season.
Seriously, all the great characters in TV grow and develop over the years (the characters from M*A*S*H come to mind). I think the show will make a much longer-lasting contribution if they allow House to learn something from all these experiences, rather than just continue to be the smug and miserable savant he started out as.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
A Duran Duran metaphor? I can’t wait to catch this ep!
February 17th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
Re: Duran Duran
The only left explanation is infection. But:
“He’d be brimming
with white blood cells”.
But there are no white blood cells, so it couldn’t be an infection, right?
House:
“Or we are
at the backstage door
of a Duran Duran concert”.
“The absence of the fans
not indicate the absence of the band?”
The band = infection
Fans = white blood cells
Normally:
infection => a lot of white blood cells.
Duran Duran plays => fans are screaming
But luck of screaming girls (no elevated level of WBC) doesn’t necessarily mean no Duran Duran concert (there is infection). It might mean: there are no more fans of Duran Duran (there is so low WBC, that the elevated level looks normal).
February 17th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Seriously, with all due respect to anyones personal supersitions, there is no more reason for House to “find Jesus”, than to “find Krishna”, “find Allah” or “find Flying Spaghetti Monster” after this episode.
There is no faith needed for not believing in God(s). Atheism is lack of faith in God(s) existence, not faith in their nonexistence. Just like abstinence is not addiction to “not drinking alcohol”.
I really like the show, even this episode, but if House becomes religious, it would completely degrade it, it would be the most laughable thing I have ever seen on TV. And I would certainly stop watching the show out of pure disgust, because it would mean that writers caved in to the pressure of religious lobbyists in US. How is he supposed to solve his cases then? Praying for answer? Sending patient to Lourdes as diagnostic treatment? Next time he gets someone with brain damage, who has religious visions and instead of searching for real answer he prays with the patient? Give me a break. Houses rationale is what makes him brilliant both as doctor and as TV character. Without it, he is not… House.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
To anyone who wrote that this(!) was a horrible episode: Sorry, you don’t know squat about drama. Or TV. Or anything else.
A beautifully balanced, well thought-out episode in which medical mystery and character relationships just panned out wonderfully. Eureka moments, Foreteen, Taub’s peculiar concerns with fidelity, Cuddy’s interplay with House AND Wilson, Cameron and Chase having their say on romantic relationships “on the job” – what’s not to like?
February 17th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
I don’t know, I noticed my wife and I both did not pay the same level of attention that we usually do to House this week.
The medical story was somewhat retreaded (just how many hallucinating religious figures are going to come through PPH?) and simply not all that interesting, and the ‘foreteen’ drama woke me up only when it looked like this horrible boring side-story would be swiftly ended. Finding out it was a play on House put me back in a stupor real fast.
Cuddy, who I normally like, has become an impotent flip-flopping shell of herself, and I too am wondering why a foster child gets a Jewish naming ceremony! Is that even legal for a foster parent to do? Indoctrinate their foster child in their faith?
The throw-away hallucination, the (literal!) throw away necrotized toe (what happened to the rest of the foot?) and fuzzy ‘Eureka’ moment did nothing to numb the pain.
When House blows the medicine AND the soap-opera in the same episode, God kills a baby Panda.
I really REALLY hope it gets better again. I miss my bitter, addicted, sarcastic savant and his team of actually interesting fellow doctors.
February 17th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Cheers charly, you beat me to mentioning the flying spaghetti-monster ;-)
I couldn’t agree with you more, his analytic views are the thing that makes House a better show altogether, and though this may not be very popular with a lot of people (especially in the US), the number of atheists and agnostics among scientists is overwhelming.
You can’t be scientific about something you’re trying to figure out if you’re seeing some supernatural beings work everywhere and write the stuff you don’t understand yet off as “well, there’s god’s will at work”.
Diseases have reasons, a solid diagnosis in the realm of physics (and after all, in case of someones psyche influencing his/her body, that counts as a physical reason, too, since it can be measured if you know what to look for).
To conclude my reply, House is damaged, sure, but him being an atheist isn’t a part of that, even if faith always provides for a nice blanket to roll yourself into, not having that blanket sometimes makes life harder since you’ve got to see things for what they really are. In other terms…the red and the blue pill :-)
February 17th, 2009 at 5:30 pm
I’m surprised noone said this, but I’m pretty sure Cuddy refused to give Foreman a letter of recommendation because she knew that could keep him from leaving. It stopped the possibility of him finding another job, leading to his being rehired (although I bet he had paid leave almost, House still had his ID card in a drawer). Cuddy was working with House, maybe she even believed what House said about “together they’re idiots.”
February 17th, 2009 at 5:43 pm
Rooster et al:
“I too am wondering why a foster child gets a Jewish naming ceremony! Is that even legal for a foster parent to do? Indoctrinate their foster child in their faith?”
So if she has (or doesn’t have) a Christmas tree for Rachel she is indoctrinating her into a faith? Which do you think Cuddy will do?
I think that foster parents often see children through various stages of the parental religion, especially if they plan to adopt. Presumably if you believe in infant baptism, for example, you would see to it that the child was baptised. Unless practicing a religion is seen as a legal obstacle to foster parenting, which would eliminate many good homes, it would have to be seen as a positive thing, not negative, to raise the children in a relgion.
February 17th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
House for sure is taking a different turn this season. I’m sure David Shore, Katie Jacobs and all the other writers of the show know what they are doing.
But I think they should kill the love story of Foreman and Thirteen! They are boring! What’s up with Chase and Cameron now? Are they still together?
There’s going to be a Huddy sex this season… Hahaha…
This is going to be fun.
February 17th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
“The fact that I was wrong is not a proof of God.”
its kind of philosophical …
btw whats that for a horrible watch House is wearing (looked a lot like product-placement in one scene House is realy trying to show the watch to the camera. ..).
keey up this good work here
Thomas
February 17th, 2009 at 6:54 pm
It’s fascinating how polarizing religion is on this forum. I had no idea. BTW, I’m an agnostic, so maybe that’s why I think the energy I feel on both of these extremes is a bit , umm, silly. Sorry, just my feelings.
What really fascinates me is the guest actors/patients. You guys remember the Mirror Syndrome patient from a few weeks ago? Showed up on CSI a couple of weeks later as a psycho impersonating an FBI agent. Now this week, the guest star from the CSI arc where Grissom leaves, the guy who played the serial killer protege, is the priest in House. It’s some kind of actor exchange program. But, I don’t think they’re produced by the same people. Anyway, for those of you cool like me, you also recognize the priest as wise-cracking, Christian Slater-as Jack Nicholson-esque intern Lyle from David Letterman’s show. I’m so glad he’s a real actor who’s getting parts now – he’s pretty good. OK, just wanted to mention that angle. -eric
February 17th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
I think you could call abstinence the “addiction to not drinking alcohol.” Especially in the case of recovering alcoholics. The focus and determination NOT to drink is often driven by the same things that drove their addiction to drink.
Likewise, many Atheists strive to know the Bible better than Christians. To me that is a faith in the non-existence of God. An Atheist who never picked up the bible or simply did a minimal amount of research I would consider someone who has no “faith” in any religion. I know a few Atheists who I consider to have a very high amount of “faith,” however. I am using Webster.com’s third definition of faith in this context:
faith: something that is believed especially with strong conviction
I was surprised to see the positive soap review. I fell asleep during the episode. I only had one good laugh; I think it was when Cuddy was yelling at Wilson for changing House’s mind.
Hearing “you’re fired” again made me sick. Again? After that point I kept trying to remember how House could fire Foreman. Since when did he allow him back in the first place?
Hearing the Stone in that piano tune was a nice touch.
The metaphor was entertaining. Watching House interact with the Priest was, by far, the very best part of the episode for me. So good, in fact, that I almost have to agree that it was a good episode overall, just because of that. I am still voting for the Private Investigator to be brought back on. I almost liked watching him with House more than Wilson. I’d love to see the three of them together- maybe get them all stuck together somewhere so we can see their similarities and differences interact.
February 17th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
@TRad
Thanks, but my question is how did Taub go to spleen? From your explanation House’s metaphor means that there is an infection with low WBC count but how do you go to spleen from there?
February 17th, 2009 at 10:00 pm
Charly, for someone who starts a post with “Seriously, with all due respect” there was an awful lot of disrespect. That’s one of those phrases that is only used when its false, like “I don’t mean to interrupt, but” or “I’m not prejudiced, but”.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:34 pm
Hear-hear, matt1618.
And to get back on topic, is it common for an alcoholic to have hallucinations after “only” six drinks?
February 18th, 2009 at 2:03 am
@ sound67: pretty smug attitude. Are you in the business? Wait…you didn’t just accuse those of us who didn’t like the ep of not knowing anything about TV or drama, but also about “anything else.” Your ad hominem attack does not strengthen your case. Few people on this forum will read past it.
February 18th, 2009 at 2:17 am
Oh, one more thing that should be obvious to anyone with any background in psychology: who can determine the nature of the priest’s original hallucination? He tells the doctors at the er that he’s not feeling well and doesn’t want to be discharged until he’s had more tests. The viewers experience the hallucination as vivid and very real, of course, and that’s assumed to be the point of view of the patient. However, considering his alcoholism and depression, combined with his clear desire to get certain symptoms evaluated by doctors, the patient could just as easily had a delusion about having had an hallucination. An alternate theory could have been that it was a confused dream from which he awoke half-drunk, thinking it was an hallucination. And of course, we cannot rule out the possibility that the patient lied (just because he didn’t lie about the teen boy doesn’t mean he never lies. Everybody lies, and his motive would be clear.) Certainly the doctors evaluating him had no way of knowing that it was a true hallucination, them not having had the benefit of watching it in HDTV.
I just would have preferred the skeptic in House to have used that as his explanation in eliminating the presenting symptom, rather than throwing out the flimsy “scotch” idea, which had already been dismissed as weak by itself. Then he could have closed that door that was obviously left open for the “god of the gaps” to sneak in. Any doctor worth his salt would have been able to come to that conclusion, atheist or not.
February 18th, 2009 at 7:28 am
I cannot stand Taub… Didn’t like him from the very beginning and he just keeps getting more annoying… and boring… no indication that he’s better w/ medince and is always mean and shows all sorts of prejudice… Anyone with me?
Also fourteen IS indeed boring… I actually don’t like foreman either. Why is he always so arrogant and self-righteous? I mean, is he really better than others, at least the first set of ducklings, at medicine?
Great review Scott, as always. thank u.
February 18th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Kate,
I feel that the bit where House leaned on the cane was at least a little bit ambiguous. And it anyway wasn’t as bad as that episode in season 4 where House electrocutes himself so that he could have a near death experience, which I felt was completely inconsistent.
In this episode the supposed moment of doubt leaning on the cane was largely made up for by the “religion is the placebo of the masses” line. I think this bit of weakness in character development can be overlooked as long it doesn’t mark the start of some religious conversion for House (I highly doubt it would).
Either way, not grounds (yet) for ceasing to watch House, at least for me.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Gotta say that I really enjoyed this week’s episode. Apparently the medicine was flimsy (not a MD myself, so I wouldn’t know), and in general it didn’t interest me. I personally feel it would be a true disservice to the show to have House find religion. I mean, I’m a Christian myself. Admittedly not a good one, but one none the less. House wouldn’t be House if he took up any religion. I think the most that character could possibily be stretched would be to maybe admit the “possibility” of religion existing … something like we can see the effects of the spaghetti monster, people screaming and running or whatnot, but we can’t see the monster, so we can’t say whether or not it exists, but until it is disproven there is a possibility. I know, I know, there are a million and three proofs of any diety existing, but there is also something in the entertainment world known as suspension of disbelieve :). But if House becomes a regular church goer, I’ll be pretty disappointed.
February 18th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
*note: the above should read “not existing”
February 18th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
No one (not even Scott) has mentioned that alcoholics do not see halucinations only when they’re drunk. They can see halucinations any time of the day or night. This is caused, not by the direct effects of alcohol, but by the long-term brain damage that chronic alcoholics eventually suffer. This is known as “delerium tremens”. Most see roaches or vermin crawing all over their bodies. A vision of the Crucifixion seems vastly peferrable to that.
February 18th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Loved the episode… Saw it already 3 times. Can’t wait for the next one…
On the other hand, great reviews al usual… Thanks for them
February 18th, 2009 at 7:35 pm
Another great review. I KNEW Foreman and Thirteen were toying House, and was glad to see that the fooled finally managed to fool the fooler. I agree about House and Cuddy going nowhere… either get them together or break them up… but every episode ends the same way! And let someone else but House have the epiphany, it’s getting boring.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
I’m confused about why Taub supposedly was not legally permitted to contact the alleged sexual partner (victim) of the priest to tell him he might have aids. I thought doctors were supposed to ask people infected with std’s to list their sexual liaisons so they could be contacted and informed.
February 18th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
Official Comment
delia,
Doctors don’t contact an STD patient’s partners themselves; it’s done by the local health department. Even then, they do it circumspectly.
Most importantly in this case, it was an alleged victim. Taub had no proof any sexual contact had occurred other than his own prejudices, and he shared privileged patient health information based on his feelings, not facts. That’s blatantly illegal under HIPAA, if not other statutes. [ And since 1) the priest did not have AIDS, and 2) the teenager was lying and the priest was telling the truth, it was all for naught.]
February 19th, 2009 at 1:41 am
@ Scott
Apparently in the next episode House changes his pain meds. The new drug makes him nicer but he also stops breathing (as seen in the promos). Any guesses? (it is not Heroin).
February 19th, 2009 at 4:09 am
Dear Scott:
I always read your reviews and enjoy them. I am always surprised how quickly you get them up.
One problem I noticed was that House was not wearing lead apron for radiation protection while Taub and Kutner were doing the angiogram. Both of them were wearing lead aprons.
Wiskott Aldrich was REALLY stretching it. It would not have entered into the differential with the presenting symptoms and the age.
I thought also the non-medical part was very good. What I see is in some episodes you get a person whose intelligence matches House. The verbal sparring is then very enjoyable as in this episode. I thought the priest although self defacing at times was able to “defeat” House in their verbal exchanges and so God did seem to “win” in this episode.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:01 am
Normally, I like House well enough that I can excuse little things here and there.
In this case: TOE! FALLING! OFF!
This guy is presumably in the hospital for less than a day, and his toe suddenly shrivels up, dying completely, and basically breaks off, and not only is House the only one to notice it, but apparently the rest of his extremities are fine.
Also, don’t all admitted patients have basic bloodwork done, and testing for AIDS? I didn’t think you could refuse it, especially if the doctors would be put at risk (re: Cameron episode), not to mention if there’s even a reasonable possibility he has it.. I’ve donated blood like, 10 times, and they do a quick test on all blood every single time.. It seems like it would be pretty common.
Someone above was complaining that someone said god ‘won’ the house vs god arguement.. I did not see where anyone had said that, so I’m not sure why they’re sick of it. Then again, I’m atheist myself, so I see it more of a House vs House thing.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:40 am
Kate overreacted in criticizing the religious content of the show. House is unwavering in his rational opposition to irrational theism. But the priest reveals his need for religion in his willingness to at least consider the proposition that the solution to several of his problems (and one assumes that his alcoholism is at least partially motivated by his loss of faith, career problems, etc.) comes from God. That is just completely characteristic of religious individuals: they are primed to accept a theist explanation for events, whereas atheists are primed to accept coincidence or simply lack of explanation. (I speak as a devoted and aggressive atheist who is however married to an extremely devout Catholic: my wife constantly speaks of “God’s will” or “God’s plan” in explaining all manner of events, ranging from small personal things to major national or world events.) Actually, I think this diversity in personalities is attractive, and it is good to have it reflected in this show.
Two more points. First, I concur that “placebo of the masses” is a splendid (and TRUE) remark. In fact, it seems like it is too good to be original with this script. I googled it (in quotes for an exact citation), and found 140 hits. Some of them are actually based on Monday’s House episode, but there are earlier citations on the net as well, including a youtube video posted in early December 2008. Still, it is a completely memorable line, and even if it isn’t original with the writers, this is surely the most public exposure of the line.
Second, Cuddy doesn’t wear Judaism on her sleeve. Still, it is unsurprising to find her reacting to emotional turmoil (the up and down business of her attempt to adopt, which is apparently being crowned with success now) by reviving some aspects of her presumed family culture (though there is no sign that her parents attended the naming ceremony). This is quite plausible. I know two very observant Jews, one of them orthodox, who are also atheists. They observe the fairly demanding rituals of Judaism as a cultural matter, not as a form of worship. I am sure that all combinations of belief/non-belief and observance/non-observance are possible, and indeed, I see several variants among my own children, raised Catholic because of their mother but only marginally observant now that they are young adults.
I found the episode a bit flat (and I never believe it when 13 kisses Foreman, it seems fake to me), but I think the ingredients were excellent, they just didn’t come together as well as they sometimes do.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:30 am
Kimberly: Yeah, the toe falling off was not only totally unrealistic, even to a medical layman like me, but te way it was acted (by Kal Penn) and filmed led both my wife and me to believe it was another hallucination sequence. We were both suprosed upon return from the break that it was supposedly for real.
I know enough just from watching “Trauma: Life in the E.R.” that necrotic body parts don’t just fall off, they have to be surgically removed. And if the toe was that far gone, it would have taken at least several days if not weeks to get there, and thus would surely have been noticed either visually when putting on his shoes and socks, or because of the pain. Not to mention that there would be enough sepsis (can you say “gangrene?”) that the entire leg would probably have to be amputated, if the patient hadn’t already died from it.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:33 am
Hoo, boy, the old fingers aren’t working very well this morning. Hope they don’t turn black and fall off!
te = the
suprosed = surprised
February 19th, 2009 at 10:39 am
With all of the rules that House bends and/or breaks, he’d balk at a surreptitious AIDS test?
As to issues of House and faith, I believe that he’s what Richard Dawkins might term a “strong agnostic,” rather firmly in the camp of “no God” but deeply faithful to the notion that the existence of God should be provable. House’s raison d’etre is solving puzzles, and what if anything happens after we die/God or no God is the ultimate puzzle. When he fences with the priest, or electrocutes himself, or infers to the Amber avatar on the dream/death bus that he’s troubled by the fact that “idealistic young lovers” are the ones who suffer or die, he’s collecting and evaluating evidence for a solution.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:18 am
I will say that if House finds religion–any religion, be it Judism, Christianity, Islamic, Buddhism–he’s not going to be the same character.
I watch this show for House (which is one of the many reasons I find Foreteen so boring). I watch it for his rationalism, his sarcasm, his pettiness, HIM. I don’t wish that House would find religion. Because he wouldn’t be the same House.
I was just bored with this episode. Foreteen puts me to sleep. That’s all. Why is it that the two most boring characters are now the focus of every episode?
I’m also tired of the “You’re fired. Wait, you’re not” routine. It’s just getting me mad. It’s no longer a tease. It’s the writers and producers saying “You don’t like these characters? Fine. We’ll put up a promo where House fires them so you’ll tune in expecting it! Psych! Haa haa haa!”
Remember when House fired Chase and it stuck? Chase isn’t on his team anymore. Why couldn’t Chase have been fired then rehired, then fired then rehired ad nauseum?
That’s a good word–Foreteen makes me nauseous! There it is.
Am I seeing more things into this, or is House’s pain getting worse?
Kat
February 19th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Much as I hate to do it, I must join the ranks of the whiney persecuted special interest groups because of this episode: It employed crude, broad, and from everything I’ve seen, utterly wrong stereotypes about atheists. To be as brief as I can, I don’t know any atheists who sit around breathlessly pining for a god. No god who would be at all desirable can be squared with reality as we actually find it in the universe (the “gods of the philosophers”), and the gods on offer from the major revealed religions are universally awful. The only gods that any human could want at all must be purely delusional, because any god that could be inferred from the cosmos would have to be utterly impersonal and profoundly uncaring, and the nomadic tribal gods in the Hebrew Bible and Koran are nasty and unattractive, and while some pretty words were put into Jesus’ mouth, the whole of his teachings is vitiated by the dogma of eternal punishment, and his credulity about the petty Hebrew deity. (If this sounds like I am personally bitter at a god, I assure you, I am not–any more than I’m personally angry at Hannibal Lecter.) To make it seem like atheists are just reacting to injustice and bad fortune and are actually sitting around like abused spouses ready and willing to give god just one more chance, if only he’d find some way to send us a sign…is insulting and absurd. I have the highest regard for the writers on the show. I don’t sit around judging every piece of entertainment through some atheist filter. But if atheism is being addressed directly, as it was in this episode of “House,” I expect a little sophistication and intelligence from this show, of any show. I was really let down. Why couldn’t an atheist be shown who is just, you know–relieved not to have to buy into what House called “religious hokum,” and who had learned to appreciate the hear and now, the graces and challenges of the present, and of human experiences and so forth…without all the pie-eyed contortionist debasement?
February 19th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Well, Greg, I can understand how you feel about people “employ[ing] crude, broad, and … utterly wrong stereotypes about atheists.” It’s similar to the way we Christians feel when people use words like “[not] at all desirable,” “universally awful,” “purely delusional,” “utterly impersonal,” “profoundly uncaring,” “nasty and unattractive,” and “petty” to describe the person we love most in life, and who loved us so much that he sacrificed his only son so that we could all escape that “eternal punishment,” and who allows the natural processes of this world to continue rather than stepping in and stopping all the suffering (which he could do any time he wishes), just so people like you will have every opportunity to accept that free gift before it’s too late.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Faith isn’t strong belief. It’s belief in the absence of reason. I’m tired of tv writers showing every atheist as missing something in their lives. It’s not exclusive to atheists.
February 20th, 2009 at 1:06 am
“Bear in mind that even these healthy people would show “insignificant traces” of a minor bug so the test tells us nothing, certainly not that the patient has AIDS”
Wasn’t that her point, that everyone had that bug but it was only affecting him because he had a weak immune system? It was the body’s response to the bug, not the bug’s presence by itself.
February 20th, 2009 at 1:17 am
After watching next weeks preview i don’t think House actually stops breathing. When they go to defib him someone actually pinches his nipples. So this is more of a misleading preview which happens on a fairly regualr basis.
unless i just saw it wrong.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:55 am
@H
Re: spleen
The dialog suggests that spleen has something to do with White Blood Cells. I’m not a doctor and never was very good with human physiology in HS. I don’t even know what are spleen’s basic functions. It’s sad that I know more about Duran Duran than about human organism.
February 20th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Hey, John. Fair points–I could have been more circumspect. But I would like to mention that I had a radical conversion to Christianity in my teens, earned a biblical studies degree at an evangelical college in preparation for ministry (I ultimately did not become ordained), worked for Billy Graham for a few years, and was very involved in church and parachurch ministries and loved my faith, which I honestly believed saved my life, probably more than once. I know from experience that everything you say about your faith feels absolutely true and right to you. It did to me as well, and I loved every moment of it. I never had a bad experience with the church, nor any unusual bad experience with Christians. It is simply mistaken. There is no shame in being mistaken…I am no doubt still mistaken about many things, probably most things. The word that I must, despite its negative connotation, insist on is delusional. I can only hope for you that someday you will be able to look back on what you wrote about how your god can step in and stop the suffering but chooses not to so I can have a chance to avoid eternal suffering as the silly, incoherent nonsense that it is. This is precisely why I am put off by Dr. House making moon-eyes at faith. Why? Why would anyone really wish to have that, to be infected with that sort of delusional thinking? It’s like Cypher in The Matrix who wants to live the lie of a pleasant virtual reality rather than looking reality in the eye and nominating himself to be a real hero in a real universe. Please…grow up. Our planet just cannot afford a great deal more reliance on the primitive ideas of our species’ childhood.
February 20th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
This episode wasn’t perfect but still very nice to watch. You can critize everything but i just try to enjoy House. I don’t know much about medicine but this show still is fun to watch.
February 20th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
I actually LOVED the religious debate in this one – and the House character went out of his way to engage with the priest character BECAUSE he wanted to engage in debate – and I found it to be intellectually stimulating and realistic. (MUCH preferable to the Foreteen empty premise – get rid of it!)
February 20th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Greg – well, I have to admit I was more than a little surprised to hear your life history, and now have a lot more respect for you than after I read your first post. You obviously are much more educated than I am in theology (in the literal sense – the scientific study of religion), so I wouldn’t dare to debate theology with you. However, I think I can now say a couple of things that I wouldn’t have bothered to before, because I wouldn’t have expected you to understand…
Firstly, I’m sure you understand that Christianity is a personal relationship with Jesus, not a religion. Yeah, there’s a lot of religious stuff that gets attached to it (especially by the Roman Catholic Church), but the essence of it is coming to know Jesus in a personal way. Although I don’t know the details of your “radical conversion”, it seems to me that someone who has truly “met” Jesus (and I’m sure you know that that’s a spiritual “meeting,” not a physical one), could never subsequently deny His existence, any more than I could claim that one of my high school teachers that I spent years with in the classroom is merely a fictional character. So I would question whether your experience as a teenager was the real thing. In fact, from your subsequent comments, I expect that you would agree it probably wasn’t.
And secondly, if in fact you’ve never been a Christian, in spite of your spending several years participating in organized religion, how can you say it’s all a delusion? One of the most basic tenets of science is “you can’t prove a negative.” Just because I’ve never met you in person, is that proof that you don’t exist, and somebody else must be authoring these posts and signing your name to them just to try to deceive me? What’s inconsistent about the position that Jesus really does exist, and you just haven’t met Him yet?
And thirdly, since this is a blog about House, let me say that I don’t particularly want him to “find religion” either, and I don’t think the writers would do that in a million years, anyhow. Unlike God, House IS a fictional character, the purpose of which is to symbolize a particular set of characteristics or points of view. This is why some people have (rightly) complained that it would basically destroy the show if House “finds religion.” I think it’s much more effective and interesting for House to remain basically who he is, and have the POTWs and other characters contrast with him, so that the audience comes away thinking. I think that’s why this show is so good, it doesn’t just tell you in your face how to think, it shows you both sides of the issue and leaves it to you to do the thinking.
February 20th, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Hello everybody,
I just watched some old episodes of house from 2nd season. Yes it’s more or less the same characters, same hospital, same mechanic… but I felt like I was watching a completely different (and much better) series than 5th season of House. I understood why I started watching House and on the same occasion I realized that it’s time for me to stop watching it. It was a good ride but now it’s over.
I’m really angry of the producers and writers. Over the last 3 years they destroyed my favorite show and they forced me to quit watching it without satisfaction of closure.
Why insist to continue making a show if it’s bleeding to death? Why not put it out of its misery with a juicy series finale at the end of the 4th season?
So, goodbye everybody.
ps: thank you Scott for all the hard work that you put in your reviews.
February 21st, 2009 at 7:44 am
I’ve spent almost a week in a hospital to have my nose fixed (the medical term is septoplasty – which in my case translates as a bad bicycle fall when I was 12 and a looot of delaying for such a simple procedure). I managed to watch House yesterday and the episode thrilled me. It’s been a very long time since we had so much soap opera action and it was all good. Just for a fraction of a second I thought that Foreteen was over – and the one think that I find unbelievable is the fact that House didn’t catch on the play. May be next episode? Still D-r Scott I would raise my soap opera score to solid A if you ask me – it was believable every step of the way and even the bemused expression on House’s face when he had to tell the guy that God virtually saved him made me cry for just a sec. The medicine was awful (spleen biopsy?) but the solution was surprisingly well played – when Wilson mentioned the whole truth I suddenly realized it was the rule of the thumb again – the simplest solution. I knew that one of the symptoms was a lie – I was unsure which one – and than bang! – even more beautiful it was the original symptom that started it all. Sure the diagnosis was a stretch (I finished reading about this syndrome a couple of minutes ago and a stretch doesn’t quite describe it ) but the way House got there – simply beautiful. So I’d raise the solution note to equal the mystery one(just a thought).
February 21st, 2009 at 11:25 am
Ouch! An ep of boredom again, this one really kinda didn´t impress me! Though it probably wasn´t all bad, I admit. The diagnosis didn´t make much sense – a severe congenital immunodefficiency remaining silent for decades, a lethal condition being cured somehow (House just told the priest he was gonna be fine), and the patient really didn´t have the typical symptoms! And btw. what explains the toe??? I didn´t like the soap either, i´m sick of firing and rehiring the docs. Someone noticed how´s that Foreman could be fired by House but I assume he only was safe during the job competition in season 4. Hope next ep is better but House slipping in a coma or what again? Doesn´t impress me cause we´ve seen that so many times (at least once every season!).
February 21st, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Aside from other things in the episode, something that particularly confused me was the toe falling off. I’m not a doctor or anything, so forgive me if I sound ignorant.
I sort of assume there’s SOME sort of ‘condition’ that can cause someone’s toe to shrivel and fall off (if not, correct me), but wouldn’t that list be pretty narrow? It seemed throughout the episode the toe was forgotten, but someone’s foot being numb and their toe turning black and dried out can’t be a very common symptom, can it?
So, I guess I was just wondering if that sort of thing is possible (The whole skin drying/blackening to the point where body parts can fall off)? And if it is, is it even common?
February 21st, 2009 at 7:30 pm
I still think Foreman and 13 are weird together. I see absolutely no chemistry between them. BTW I can’t see any chemistry (or matching personalities) between Cameron and Chase either, although this is better because they appear so rarely on the show.
February 22nd, 2009 at 11:12 am
I’m really interested in the demographics of the people who dislike this show (yet are still coming here consistently to read reviews), versus those who think its the greatest show ever (like me). Is it an age thing, an occupation thing?
Anyway, I’m also a bit tired of reading comments like “how could they do this, its illegal” etc.
Yes Foreman screwed up the trial.
Yes Taub broke HIPAA regulations.
Maybe Cameron should have seen the toe…
People…TV is not supposed to be an ideal world. It’s a representation of our world which makes us identify with it. Guess what…in the real world, people make mistakes, people are selfish…people break rules. That’s society! It may not be good, but that’s what happens everyday on a much larger scale.
Two thumbs to the writers of House for depicting the real world and not conforming to some 1950’s socially conservative, idealistic world.
February 22nd, 2009 at 11:21 am
Personally, I always find alcoholic priests highly entertaining. Apart from that its probably not an episode that’s going to make history – that is if people stop moping about it.
February 22nd, 2009 at 1:08 pm
C’mon people it was a great episode stop complaining! Sure the show has it’s flows and it is a bit less well “House” than the first 3 seasons but it is still great entertainment. And it is way better than the other medical shows that are all over. At least here they try to make sense with the diseases and diagnoses and the science overall. And the characters are so alive and real – their good and bad qualities are TV-eed and exaggerated but still believable and plausible. Sure I dislike the way certain things are progressing but I still love it. Viva House! Ant big 10x to D-r Scott and every other competent person here who try to make medical and science and moral sense out of a TV show.
February 22nd, 2009 at 10:01 pm
If you guys didn’t notice the coincidences you are taking in to account as negative are fundamental to making a point in the story. remember when the priest said”that’s a lot of coincidences”, and house stoops his head on his cane? this is a theme in the story touching faith, beliefs. The coincidences were crucial in order to deliver a considerable idea towards the end.
February 23rd, 2009 at 8:58 am
I think we may be reading far too much into the religion thing here.
On Cuddy: a religious ceremony, while to many athiests it is hypocritical, it is not just about the religion, which I believe Cuddy remarked.
Take Ireland as an example. To a large extent many that I know would, like myself, be athiest. However, if asked they would also say they are Catholics. Catholicism has played such a huge role in life and ubringing here that it transcends the actual “faith” bit and becomes a becomes part of the culture. While spritually you may be an athiest, culturally you are a Catholic.
I’m guessing it’s the same sense of tradition and upbringing with Cuddy. She may not be observant, but the tradition and culture overshadow the faith aspect. It seems to be a mammy thing. You can only call yourself Irish if you’ve a Catholic Irish Mother.
And House not arguing back at the end? He seemed to like the guy and the guy was just thinking out loud rather than suddenly renewing his faith. I wouldn’t be reading too much into that just yet.
February 23rd, 2009 at 10:55 am
John H, all I can really say in response to what you’ve written is that if my self of about fifteen years ago had read what I wrote, I would have responded exactly as you have. Exactly. And with absolute, utter sincerity, confidence, and authority.
So let me suggest to you if you harbor suspicions about my Christian experience, then to be fair you must acknowledge that it is at least possible that, despite all subjective evidence to the contrary, you might find yourself admitting some day as I do now that everything I thought I knew, everything that I fervently believed, was mistaken. Or, to give your response the respect it deserves, at least not likely to be based on demonstrable facts. On the one hand you have the subjective experience of the supernatural, which is common to nearly all religions (which cannot all be right but can all be mistaken); and on the other hand you have beliefs based on…and I’m struggling for the right word here. I don’t wish to be intentionally inflammatory. How about UNRELIABLE information? Evolution, for example, is simply a fact about life on earth. And that fact seems to game the whole “original sin” hypothesis, which makes the need for a savior appear highly doubtful. And the record about Jesus, while not filled with the large number of irreconcilable contradictions that some atheists with no religious background suppose, still has significant problems (just try to get the Easter story to work out using all four Gospels), shows all the hallmarks of mythology, and contains a fair number of other issues I don’t have time to go into. Perhaps the biggest problem for the Gospel record is that nothing attested to in it is corroborated by any secular source (and the ones ginned up from Josephus and the like are rather obvious frauds).
A guy named William Clifford wrote something excellent called “The Ethics of Belief” in which he says, “This sense of power is the highest and best of pleasures when the belief on which it is founded is a true belief, and has been fairly earned by investigation. For then we may justly feel that it is common property, and hold good for others as well as for ourselves. Then we may be glad, not that I have learned secrets by which I am safer and stronger, but that we men have got mastery over more of the world; and we shall be strong, not for ourselves but in the name of Man and his strength. But if the belief has been accepted on insufficient evidence, the pleasure is a stolen one. Not only does it deceive ourselves by giving us a sense of power which we do not really possess, but it is sinful, because it is stolen in defiance of our duty to mankind. That duty is to guard ourselves from such beliefs as from pestilence, which may shortly master our own body and then spread to the rest of the town. What would be thought of one who, for the sake of a sweet fruit, should deliberately run the risk of delivering a plague upon his family and his neighbors?”
I would say that whatever sense of personal relationship with Jesus you have (and I really understand what an amazing feeling that is), whatever existential answers you feel that Christianity has provided you…are in the sense Clifford writes about stolen, because they are taken on insufficient evidence. Grossly insufficient evidence. And even evidence that points in the opposite direction.
February 23rd, 2009 at 4:21 pm
I figured : “Why bother (again) with the religion theme?” Coul have just stayed silent here – the question of the matter is beyond discussion for me at least. After all there were tree episodes of House discussing religion and they all proved you point Greg. I myself am a stern atheist – I do not believe there was ever a time in my life even in childhood when I could take the Bible as a book of truth. Then I kept on reading and discovering facts of life I kept on learning and the more my view expanded the more I knew that I was right not be religious, not to believe in God (any god btw). There was a book by Ethel Lilian Voynich “The Gadfly” where I read the most convincing idea about the true origin of religion – NEED. Man needed somebody above him, it is a decease of the mind to place an idol and worship it because you need to dump your crap somewhere. Then in “House vs God” House actually said the very same thing – different words, same thing: “You know, I get it people just lookin’ for a way to fill the holes…BUT they want the holes, they want to live in the holes! And they go nuts when someone else pours durt in their holes…CLIMB OUT OF YOUR HOLES PEOPLE!” I think House said it there for me, for you Greg and for everybody else who like us managed to understand, that while religion is beautiful and pleasant it is as real an experience as a good morphine shot. The rest is history. To anybody interested in widening their view a bit more I suggest the documentary “Zeitgeist” – religion there is scientifically well… dissected to the basis that it is. I studied the Bible vary carefully before taking that position, and I also am still reading everything that I can find concerning the issue. One of the arguments most Christians use is: “But you have no way of knowing! May be it is true – you can’t know for sure!”Instead of giving you more Froydean or other “proof” I’ll cite (loosely) Douglas Adams’s Dirk Gently: “Sure, you can’t know for sure. If it has legs, wings, feathers, if it is a tad chubby and yellow and can swim, as well as fly, and if it makes a quaking noise it can still be a dog, but you should at least consider the possibility to be a duck”
February 23rd, 2009 at 11:23 pm
Episode #16 – where are u Scott? I’mmm gettinggg ssshakkeeyyy!!!
February 24th, 2009 at 2:43 am
[...] Din start vreau sa spun ca acest post nu este o recenzie a episodului, ci mai degraba o analiza a cazului medical. O sa incerc saptamanal sa realizez aceasta fisa a pacientului. Indrumator [...]
February 24th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
I find it weird that the priest says “a lot of coincidences”
I didn’t find many at all
He was just a normal patient who was admitted to the ER. House wanted a fake patient, and chose the priest, just to make a point about religion.
And the episode continued from there.
I don’t find this to be “alot of coincidences”
I think I’ve had more coincidences in a friday out in the city.
I don’t particularly agree with houses approach to religion. I’m an atheist myself, and I do believe that religion should be done away with. However, I don’t believe we should be militant, like House is. House shows that atheism can’t be forced, and you sound like an annoying ass when you do (Same with those damn missionaries and converters. GET AWAY FROM MY HOUSE)
This episode was fairly poorly done in the case of trying to show religion and House. They forced some random symptoms around, and BOOM Hallucination isnt a symptom, and everything goes down from there. This was a huge problem, and I suppose its a problem with trying to throw religion around.
I suppose they were trying to get through something more. People want to believe in a God, cause its an opiate. Not particulary the Christian God, who isn’t exactly the nicest guy, but some higher power. Its a placebo. For House, it would be the perfect escape, and he wants to believe it, but he can’t as he is a rational and realist thinker.
February 24th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
Another thing you didn’t mention. Wiskott-Aldrich seems like an unlikely diagnosis since he would have most likely have had manifestations of the illness from a young age.
February 27th, 2009 at 8:58 am
Greg – well, this is certainly getting way beyond the medical aspects of the TV show, but I’m glad Scott has allowed this thread to stay. It’s apparent that we’re going to have to “agree to disagree” here, but let me just say one thing about your last post.
I’ve always felt that there are two ways of coming to accept something as true – scientific proof and faith. The two are mutually exclusive in the sense that if you can prove something scientifically, no faith is required. And I think that works the other way too – if you can accept something by faith, no scientific proof is required.
Now I know right now you’re thinking, well, if I’m going to accept something as true without any scientific proof, it could just as well be the Flying Spaghetti Monster as the God of the Bible. And in one sense that’s true. People make up religions all the time. That in itself is not proof that all religions are made up, but I certainly wouldn’t disagree that most of them are. And a made-up religion (as the FSM people demonstrate so well) can be made to look just like truth.
But truth is what it is, not what we make up. If you jump off a tall building, you will die no matter now strongly you disbelieve the law of gravity. That’s kind of a weak analogy because it’s pretty easy to scientifically prove the law of gravity, and thus no faith is required. But my point is that God either exists or he doesn’t, quite independently of what you or I or anyone else believes, and also in spite of the fact that there is insufficient scientific evidence to prove either way. The lack of evidence does not change reality, and the strength or weakness of anyone’s faith does not change reality.
So I see our task in life simply as trying to determine what this absolute truth is, as accurately as possible, given the tools we have available (science and faith), and given that both of those tools have their limitations. It is not unreasonable for two intelligent people (and I’m unabashedly including you and me in that group) to come to two different conclusions, and it’s also not unreasonable for a person to change their conclusion over time (as you have) based on either new input or a reinterpretation of existing input. But the fact remains that truth is absolute, so we can’t both be right. It can’t be that “God exists for me but not for you.” One of us is wrong, and it looks like we’ll just have to leave it at that, at least for now.
To end this post on a lighter note (and I hope this doesn’t come across as trite), I’m reminded of the reply a friend of mine from high school always gave to people with whom he had this kind of discussion: “Look me up in 100 years and we’ll talk about it.” ;-)
February 27th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Hmm, I actually like this particular episode of House.
The story delves into a person’s own FAITH, not Religion. (How come this thread had become a discussion on religion? Oh well, it was fun to read all your posts, anyway)
The mind-boggling (albeit ludicrous, at least in some diagnoses) medical mysteries and entertaining story lines of this show still makes it one of the most (if not the most) superior TV shows today.
February 27th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Oh and the music played by House at the end! Wow.
March 2nd, 2009 at 12:15 am
“Evolution, for example, is simply a fact about life on earth. And that fact seems to game the whole “original sin” hypothesis, which makes the need for a savior appear highly doubtful.”
Theory = fact? Biological adaptation is a fact. No one in their right mind questions that species adapt to their environment. The theory that the process began a trillion years ago from primordial ooze (evolution, as I interpret your statement about gaming the original sin hypothesis to mean) is far from proven. It requires more faith to believe that than in a Power Greater than Myself, IMHO.
Now, on topic this time: I am a newcomer to the House forum. I’ve been watching the current season on hulu, and catching up on previous seasons at the library on DVD. I much prefer the older episodes than the current season, mainly due to the clinic scenes. Has House set foot in the clinic this season? At what point was he excused from that duty (I can only assume it was in season 4 or early in season 5, because all his problems with the police officer in season 3 stemmed from a clinic visit.)
Thanks, Scott, for this awesome resource. It has greatly enhanced my viewing of House. I’ve always been one to read the last chapter of a mystery part way through the book, because I can’t stand the suspense. Your reviews are much like the final chapter!!
March 2nd, 2009 at 2:29 am
Unfortunately in 100 years will be a bit late for both of us no matter who is right or wrong. For men of science is harder however to agree to disagree – after all we have proof instead of faith so to admit otherwise is difficult if not impossible. And to revert to you example with gravity – even Jesus refused to test gravity when tempted. After all why – it was a choice to believe in gravity or God and he chose gravity? I shiver in terror here…. In high school one of our teachers was very religeous so we used to jerk him around with questions like – so we do not believe what will happen to us after death – hell? He said no – you will die for good while who believes will resurrect like Jesus. At this point I said – way to scare me into believing dude – it’s pretty much what I expect to happen anyway. Do you see me tremble in fear? But I got sidetracked again. My point is that while it is true that personal beliefs are something you shouldn’t mess with and we have to learn to agree to disagree it is impossible for people who know to simply be silent around people who just want it to be. It is the same with heroin or any other abused drug – it gives you fake happiness but it is a slow poison. It poisons your mind it poisons your body. And that is why I/we/Greg/all will not be silent. And House will not be silent as well for that matter :)
March 2nd, 2009 at 4:19 am
I’ve been reading Scott’s posts ever since the first episode came out, but never got to actually comment on anything. I’ve really enjoyed the blog a lot, mostly because I’m fascinated with medicine (used to practice it before) and because I’m fascinated with House as a character. There are three things in particular that surprise me the most about this last post’s discussion and prompted me to speak up:
1) though it’s a medical blog, it’s religion faith issues that deserved most of the attention in comments (though the medicine was mad enough to keep the conversation going in the medically critical direction). I crossed out religion on purpose, because I think religion and faith are totally different things and have nothing in common. I’m not a religious person, but I have faith in God. And I thing it is faith issues that keep being so attractive to House all those episodes that even make him actually talk to his patients willingly (like in this episode he even ate with his patient), which he usually tries to avoid;
2) the tone of the conversations (no matter how strong people disagree on things) does cling to the name of the blog “Polite Dissent”, I really appreciate the fact that you guys care to be polite to each other in expressing your opinions;
3) the episode was rich in bright quotes, and though many of you have cited Marx’s “Placebo for the masses”, no one seemed to have noticed Einstein’s words “Coincidence is God’s way of staying anonymous”. I know Einstein wasn’t much of a believer, but even he, being a scientist, admitted the following “I’m not an atheist. I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws”, which I totally agree with.
I want to say that I greatly enjoy our polite conversations (especially the dialogue between Greg and John H) and I want to thank you all (not just Scott) for your interesting and thought provoking comments.
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:15 am
With all due respect, D-r Bulgaria, you’ve missed the point. There is insufficient scientific evidence to prove that God exists, and there is insufficient scientific evidence to prove that He doesn’t. The best a pure scientist could say would be, “I have no idea whether God exists or not.” To take either position requires faith. The theists look at the available data and conclude there is a God; the atheists look at the same data and conclude that there is not.
The difference is that once one accepts the existence of God through faith, something unexpected happens. We discover that something comes alive in us that wasn’t there before. The best way I’ve heard it described (although even this is not really very good) is to say that our lives take on a spiritual aspect, whereas previously we had been purely physical beings. Hence the term “born again,” which people who’ve never experienced it like to make so much fun of.
Now it makes perfect sense to me (because I’ve been there) why someone who has never experienced this “spiritual birth” might think that the physical universe is all there is, that anything more is just fantasy or wishful thinking. And since science is the study of the physical universe, such a person might logically conclude that anything that can’t be proven by science must not exist. Trust me, I understand that point of view because I used to hold it myself. But like so many things in life, it’s turned out to be woefully insufficient.
I had to smile at your statement, “…it is impossible for people who know to simply be silent around people who just want it to be,” because that’s exactly how I feel, too! If you’ll indulge me for a moment, it’s rather like, if one could somehow communicate with a fetus who had not yet been physically born, trying to describe the beauty of nature. You could go on and on about the majestic trees and the snow-capped mountains and the colorful sunsets, and they wouldn’t have the foggiest idea what you’re talking about, because having not yet been born, they would have no experience of the physical universe upon which to draw for understanding. It’s very similar when someone who has been “born again” tries to describe the spiritual realm to someone who hasn’t. It makes no sense because there’s no common experience there to draw on. The best I can do is to tell you that I know it’s real because I’ve experienced it every day since Nov. 10, 1978, that I totally understand why you don’t understand, and that I pray that someday God will open your eyes so that you can experience it, too.
March 2nd, 2009 at 3:01 pm
At this moment John H I feel pretty much like the protagonist from my favorite book “The Gadfly”. I’m ready to weep on your shoulder and I feel almost compelled to embrace you. You won me over with your christian patience and humility. Besides you make a very good point – there is insufficient proof for both. However the proof against “God(s)” is significantly more than the proof “for”. Before I continue I have to say that I actually am a believer – I believe there are things we don’t know and understand at the moment but they too will find their logical explanation in due time. There is a truth beyond the material – we’ll find it and study it when we have the tools for that. Quantum physics for example is a very good scientific explanation about the stuff we usually label “God”. It has just started – like so many sciences that have evolved over the years and even become obsolete because the human mind knows no boundaries and never gives up. We’ll have the “truth at the end – probably not in the next 10 000 years but who knows? Like most of the people who are here John, you seem educated, you try to prove your point with something more than “Because God said so!” and I respect you for that. And I am so tired of arguing with fanatics, people who know nothing about the meaning of the words “faith” and “science” but shout when you try to teach them anything beyond their narrow little view. As a man of some intellect that you certainly look like, you must know the basics of the scientific method – observation of repeating events, artificially creating the conditions for these events, successfully recreating them thus proving their validity etc. You should also be familiar with the stuff called “logic” – inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. The first gives us ideas – the second helps us prove and extrapolate from existing truths. My point is that we do not have enough proof that God exists ACCORDING TO THE BASIC KNOWLEDGE WE POSSESS SO FAR. Also WE CAN PROVE THAT HE DOESN’T EXIST, AGAIN BASED ON THE EXISTING KNOWLEDGE. There may be stuff that science does not know about that can disprove that thesis but the human knowledge so far disproves the existence of god. Until new knowledge is found we have to assume that God doesn’t exist. Are you following me so far? I know it sounds confusing. The main prove that I can point out is LOGIC itself – God defies logic so he cannot be real. Until we prove that logic itself is faulty we have to assume that it isn’t. Here’s my boss’s funniest logical proof that God cannot exist:
1. If God truly exists the way it is described in the Bible(you can place any holy books name here I don’t mind)than he is all-powerful, all-mighty and all-knowing. There is nothing he cannot do – he can do everything
2. From 1. – God can create a rock so big and heavy that no one should be able to lift it – no one in the whole universe in the very existence.
3. Since no one can lift the said-so rock that means that God himself will not be able to lift it.
4. Since God can not lift this rock that means that he is not all-powerful, all-mighty and all-knowing.
5. We arrive at a contradiction witch means that the basic assumption is faulty. Ergo God does not exist.
We really, really left the original subject of this whole discussion here and I wouldn’t be surprised if D-r Scott decides to erase the whole thing that I wrote (that we religion freaks all wrote for that matter). That would be my final post on the subject and I thank everybody for the patience.
P.S. Galina I noticed very well the mention of Einstein in the episode, however I respect this guy way too much to dip his brilliance into the whole religious ranting. Besides we couldn’t know for sure but I think we can bravely assume he was talking about the unknown in general, the “truth” the “problem(s)” that he wouldn’t solve because he lacked time/equipment/knowledge/resources. And I seriously doubt he would have searched the answers any other way than scientifically. His reflections are proof of him being open minded, not religious.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:18 am
Just about eliminating symptoms, House has done that long before but he always knew why he did that, e.g. in Occam´s razor or Damned if you do. Never ´cause of an idea!
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:57 pm
John H and Greg, I hope you guys can sit down and have a cup of coffee together.
Galina, you are right. Aside from a couple of comments, everyone has been quite respectful in the “House vs. God” discussion, and that, along with Scott’s medical critiques, is the reason I come back here! Thanks Scott!
March 11th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
How did House manage to slip through the closing elevator’s doors without tripping the sensor that would have stopped the doors closing?
April 7th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
1. There are scientists who are theists, and atheists who are ignorant idiots. Stop associating theism with ignorance and atheism with science. False logic. And House is human, however much he denies it — he too can be unsettled, or left in the dark, or experience moments of doubt. Emotions have nothing to do with rationality.
2. Theists and atheists alike I tolerate. Idiots, however, are a different issue: as strange as it seems, kids, Fox isn’t actually part of the government. On any level.
3. ADJ: I’m pretty sure you actually have to touch the doors for them to retreat.
May 27th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Wtf this episode didnt imply at all house needs faith he was only sad cause he was right about the priest and because cuddy didnt want him in the baby naming ceremony, the priest was hoping regain his faith like house said, he only needed an excuse.House still atheist and he never gonna need faith or a belief in supernatural nonsense.
June 7th, 2009 at 4:12 am
A quick, belated comment from the other side of the Atlantic (i.e. I’m still nowhere near the end of Season 5 yet).
In response to Kate, there has been a lot more religion in this season than previous ones but the comment about the woman in Florida and her cheese sandwich would indicate that House isn’t about to lose the power of rational thought in some sort of epiphany, wouldn’t it?
If I’m wrong on this one (don’t tell me yet) then House’ll be history for me too – but that’d be like turning Mary Poppins into Hannibal Lecter.
August 12th, 2009 at 5:55 am
“Religion is not the opiate of the masses, it is the placebo of the masses”
Great line!
September 17th, 2009 at 9:24 am
One thing I didn’t see you mention, but was like nails on a chalkboard to me was when Kutner, I believe, said “EKG ruled out an MI”. It had been pounded into my brain that a negative EKG does NOT rule out an MI. But I do want to say, I thoroughly enjoy watching House (most of the episodes anyway) and reading your reviews on them. Very nice job, keep it up.