Certain people can't ever get it right

[mentalgymnast]

You didn’t come back with your questions. Are you not able to encapsulate your questions within a long post into one or two questions that you believe might cut to the chase? I’m willing to look at those. Shouldn’t be to hard to do that? Right?

I take issue with your belief that I am not able to explain myself. That is a rather binary statement you’re making. But of course, you know that...or do you?

If you don’t come back with your one or two consolidated questions then, as you said, be well and stay safe.

Unfortunately, I've fallen for your promises before, MG. I'm going to pass this time.


.

Has there been a time when I’ve said that I will revisit or answer a limited set of questions and haven’t? If so, that would actually surprise me. I try to follow through on actual commitments made.

I’m thinking there must be some other reason you would rather not ask your question or two at this point. One can only guess.

Fine. Maybe next time around.

Regards,
MG

[mentalgymnast]

I think people can see his place in the history of religion as meaningful and still see him as unworthy of their trust. They can find intellectual pleasure in engaging the universe is Mormon thought that has grown out of the seeds he planted and have a "nuanced" view of his impact on the world while recognizing fully he was a liar and cheat, adulterer and narcissist. But when it comes to how I am willing to let Joseph Smith have influence over my life? That door is closed.

Definitely. I find the history interesting because it directly influenced my ancestors, and the paths of their lives, but continuing with the cult simply because we were born into it is something that thoughtful people can move beyond. It's not easy, but I get the sense there's a pretty solid generation of people doing just that, in an ethical, moral, and responsible way.

Excepting those that look past Joseph’s weaknesses so as to develop a faith and testimony in Christ and His gospel. I know very few people, well none, that worship Joseph Smith. However, there are many people that come to Christ through the restoration which was ushered into the world through the prophet. Taking into account the mixed messages that come to us in regards to Joseph, I find that a focus on Christ and His gospel as delivered through the prophets as being of primary importance.

Regards,
MG

[Lem]

Unfortunately, I've fallen for your promises before, MG. I'm going to pass this time.

I don't blame you. he's done this many, many times, and he never follows through. It's as though he has some other reason for posting here than to engage in legitimate interaction.

Telling every single person who interacts with him in every single thread, no matter the topic, that they are binary thinkers is this round's derailment technique. It is what derailing trolls do.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Apologists do not actually wish to dialogue, they are not teachable. They already possess the truth, they want to preach. In their minds to learn anything from anyone who doesn't accept their theology is a bitter pill to swallow, so they don't swallow that pill much.

Boy, this was a prescient comment.

- Doc

[mentalgymnast]

Unfortunately, I've fallen for your promises before, MG. I'm going to pass this time.

I don't blame you. he's done this many, many times, and he never follows through. It's as though he has some other reason for posting here than to engage in legitimate interaction.

Untrue on both counts. How do you say this with a straight face? CFR.

Telling every single person who interacts with him in every single thread, no matter the topic, that they are binary thinkers is this round's derailment technique. It is what derailing trolls do.

I think you may actually be a bit loony.

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

Or simply, to remain an immature thinker. That's the kindest term one can use for someone who participates here with such an obvious intent to divisively troll.

It's cute that MG believes that he can diagnose his own intellectual maturity and concludes that he is far more advanced than most people. Some might take these antics to indicate a person who isn't very mature.

Here lies a classic problem with the observer interfering with the experiment. In this case, the interference comes from MG playing the role of both the doctor and the patient. Suppose for a moment that MG is at stage 3, ignoring or banishing all conflicts to his cherished beliefs. Suppose that as a stage 3, only looking for information that supports his cemented conclusions, that he stumbles upon Fowlers stages of faith, or more likely, apologists bolstering the stature of believers, in the context of Fowler's stages. He ingests this material in the capacity of an observer. As an observer, he comes to believe that higher stages indicate spiritual and intellectual advancement, and fortuitously, the higher levels are associated with reconciling challenges to faith. Now, he has a new tool for banishing all conflicting information, as a thoroughgoing stage 3: He knows, from looking in the back of the book, that mature thinkers will eventually work out conflicts to faith and hold "nuanced" beliefs. Therefore, he doesn't actually have to go through this stage himself, he can take on the biggest and badest challenges and shoot from the hip. His efforts appear flippant, because It doesn't matter if he hits or misses, as "hit" means he wins directly, while "miss" means he adds complexity. It's the ultimate tool to ensure water flows from the back of the duck.

MG, should he actually be a stage 3 opportunistically using his knowledge of the stages to protect himself from doubt, would not be alone. The entire market of postmodern-influenced apologetics (Givens, Christiansen) is made up, in my opinion, of "stage 3s" who opportunistically study postmodernism -- they aren't really interested in the topic too much for its own sake -- in order to use the results of postmodernism to lower the bar for maintaining belief. "Did you know there's no such thing as Truth, with a capital 't'? The critics don't! They think they can prove a belief right or wrong! An errant quest for certainty -- they repeat the failure of modernism."

Stage 3 – "Synthetic-Conventional" faith (arising in adolescence; aged 12 to adulthood) characterized by conformity to authority and the religious development of a personal identity. Any conflicts with one's beliefs are ignored at this stage due to the fear of threat from inconsistencies.
Stage 4 – "Individuative-Reflective" faith (usually mid-twenties to late thirties) a stage of angst and struggle. The individual takes personal responsibility for his or her beliefs and feelings. As one is able to reflect on one's own beliefs, there is an openness to a new complexity of faith, but this also increases the awareness of conflicts in one's belief.

[Morley]

Unfortunately, I've fallen for your promises before, MG. I'm going to pass this time.


.

Has there been a time when I’ve said that I will revisit or answer a limited set of questions and haven’t? If so, that would actually surprise me. I try to follow through on actual commitments made.

I’m thinking there must be some other reason you would rather not ask your question or two at this point. One can only guess.

Since you can't just let this go, MG, here it is.

I really don't have any reason to rephrase a question you've previously said you didn't want to answer. If you wanted to answer it, you would have already. If you've changed your mind about answering it, you would go back and look at it, now. It's plain you don't.

To the other point, more than once you've promised to answer a question if I would just answer yours. It was too often a promise you didn't keep. When I called you on it, you gave the same kind of brush-off you gave this time (when you said you don't get all your questions answered, either). Other times you've bailed without answering because you thought others were being mean to you. Even other times, you've changed the subject when things got uncomfortable and then you haven't returned to something you said you would. So, I'm learning to bail when you start doing one of these things in a thread.

I'm sure others have had similar experiences.

If all this makes me binary and you nuanced, so be it. Like honor, I'm glad to be whatever it is that you're calling binary.


.

[mentalgymnast]

Or simply, to remain an immature thinker. That's the kindest term one can use for someone who participates here with such an obvious intent to divisively troll.

It's cute that MG believes that he can diagnose his own intellectual maturity and concludes that he is far more advanced than most people.

Untrue. The contagion seems to be spreading.

What is true is that I seem to causing a bit of a ruckus. Why? I’ve been expressing points of view that happen to conflict with majority views. Is that a sin?

Some more untruths yet to come...

Regards,
MG

[mentalgymnast]

Or simply, to remain an immature thinker. That's the kindest term one can use for someone who participates here with such an obvious intent to divisively troll.

It's cute that MG believes that he can diagnose his own intellectual maturity and concludes that he is far more advanced than most people. Some might take these antics to indicate a person who isn't very mature.

Here lies a classic problem with the observer interfering with the experiment. In this case, the interference comes from MG playing the role of both the doctor and the patient. Suppose for a moment that MG is at stage 3, ignoring or banishing all conflicts to his cherished beliefs. Suppose that as a stage 3, only looking for information that supports his cemented conclusions, that he stumbles upon Fowlers stages of faith, or more likely, apologists bolstering the stature of believers, in the context of Fowler's stages. He ingests this material in the capacity of an observer. As an observer, he comes to believe that higher stages indicate spiritual and intellectual advancement, and fortuitously, the higher levels are associated with reconciling challenges to faith. Now, he has a new tool for banishing all conflicting information, as a thoroughgoing stage 3: He knows, from looking in the back of the book, that mature thinkers will eventually work out conflicts to faith and hold "nuanced" beliefs. Therefore, he doesn't actually have to go through this stage himself, he can take on the biggest and badest challenges and shoot from the hip. His efforts appear flippant, because It doesn't matter if he hits or misses, as "hit" means he wins directly, while "miss" means he adds complexity. It's the ultimate tool to ensure water flows from the back of the duck.

MG, should he actually be a stage 3 opportunistically using his knowledge of the stages to protect himself from doubt, would not be alone. The entire market of postmodern-influenced apologetics (Givens, Christiansen) is made up, in my opinion, of "stage 3s" who opportunistically study postmodernism -- they aren't really interested in the topic too much for its own sake -- in order to use the results of postmodernism to lower the bar for maintaining belief. "Did you know there's no such thing as Truth, with a capital 't'? The critics don't! They think they can prove a belief right or wrong! An errant quest for certainty -- they repeat the failure of modernism."

Stage 3 – "Synthetic-Conventional" faith (arising in adolescence; aged 12 to adulthood) characterized by conformity to authority and the religious development of a personal identity. Any conflicts with one's beliefs are ignored at this stage due to the fear of threat from inconsistencies.
Stage 4 – "Individuative-Reflective" faith (usually mid-twenties to late thirties) a stage of angst and struggle. The individual takes personal responsibility for his or her beliefs and feelings. As one is able to reflect on one's own beliefs, there is an openness to a new complexity of faith, but this also increases the awareness of conflicts in one's belief.

Anything to protect your cherished beliefs.

This is getting weird.

Regards,
MG

[Lem]

Or simply, to remain an immature thinker. That's the kindest term one can use for someone who participates here with such an obvious intent to divisively troll.

It's cute that MG believes that he can diagnose his own intellectual maturity and concludes that he is far more advanced than most people. Some might take these antics to indicate a person who isn't very mature.

Indeed.

His efforts appear flippant, because It doesn't matter if he hits or misses, as "hit" means he wins directly, while "miss" means he adds complexity. It's the ultimate tool to ensure water flows from the back of the duck.