Why Do Mormons Have a Tendancy to be Judgmental?

[_Blixa]

Really? I don't think it is a fine line at all---two different things! Wish I had the time and energy to expand on how I conceptualize this, but like my avatar I'm currently exhausted and really should be working on "real" work...

[_wenglund]

Again, I am quite certain that you are being wrongfully, and ironically, judgemental of me here. In fact, earlier in the thread I readily admitted to being judgemental (resorting to unrighteous judgement), myself. I have also admitted that judgementalism occurs in the Church. And, I believe judgementalism is wrong. So, what you suggest about me is, itself, and in multiple ways, demonstrably in error. It will interesting to see if you are willing to admit this, or whether you will inadvertantly render yourself guilty and/or projective of what you errantly accused me of. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Great. Like I said, I hadn't read the entire thread. I based my comments on your last post or two (and past history of my reading of your posts).

I hope we can all learn from this about not rushing to judgement. ;-)

If you've turned over a new leaf, and are ready to admit the church is at fault for some things, great.

But I doubt it...

The new leaf that I have turned, in terms of judgementalism, is to be less inclined to find and judge fault (whether in cases involving the Church or not), and more inclined to find and implement improvements--i.e. look at things in terms of problem/solution, rather than blame. And, in terms of problems and solution, my new leaf also entails focusing more inward, on how I can improve myself, rather than externally, on what other can do to improve themselves.

I have found this new leaf, in striving to be less judgemental, to have already yeilded benefits to me as well as those I have been judgemental towards. And, I would commend the same to one and all (whether in or out of the Chruch). What better time to change over to this new leaf than in Spring, when trees of all types are undergoing the same.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Runtu]

Really? I don't think it is a fine line at all---two different things! Wish I had the time and energy to expand on how I conceptualize this, but like my avatar I'm currently exhausted and really should be working on "real" work...

I'm tired too, and not thinking very clearly at the moment. Not enough caffeine in the system.

[_wenglund]

Also, I don't know if it is judgemental to logically (deductively and/or inductively) conclude that someone who is speeding is less valiant in observing posted speed limits, regardless of the reason for speeding, and particularly if one doesn't know the reasons. That someone may have good cause to break the speed limit, doesn't alter the fact that they are breaking the speed limit, which logically makes them less valiant in obeying the speed limit than those rigorously obeying the law. Viewing it that way is, to me, more an observation than judgementalism.

You appear to be saying Wade that blind obedient acceptance of authority is always a valiant good thing.

While I can understand how you may have read that into what I said, that isn't anything close to what I thought or meant.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Who Knows]

The new leaf that I have turned, in terms of judgementalism, is to be less inclined to find and judge fault (whether in cases involving the Church or not), and more inclined to find and implement improvements--I.e. look at things in terms of problem/solution, rather than blame. And, in terms of problems and solution, my new leaf also entails focusing more inward, on how I can improve myself, rather than externally, on what other can do to improve themselves.

I have found this new leaf, in striving to be less judgemental, to have already yeilded benefits to me as well as those I have been judgemental towards. And, I would commend the same to one and all (whether in or out of the Chruch). What better time to change over to this new leaf than in Spring, when trees of all types are undergoing the same.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Well good for you. bravo.

Just one suggestion, if i may: You might find more success if you weren't so condescending - a.k.a., judgemental. ;)

[_wenglund]

Then I misspoke. I think the church encourages judging in certain areas. I do not believe the church is more or less prone to judgmentalism than other similar religious groups.

That's the point I was trying to make earlier. Anyone who's made out to be 'more special' than everyone else, is inevitably going to have some degree of judgmentalism. Whether you're Mormon, muslim, a scientologist, etc.

I am not familiar with the "more special" notion within my faith--having no recollection of it being espoused by any of the General Authorities. Perhaps you could provide some examples.

I am, though, aware of notions like "chosen people" and "worthiness" espoused with the Church which may be interpreted by certain members (though not all, and thus not "inevitably") as a license for at least some degree of judgementalism.

But, the same may be true of a broad range of differentiators (secular and religious), particularly those of an ordinal nature. For example, we have the grading system in public schools, grade levels, graduations and degrees. We also have socio-economic distinctions: poor, middle-class, and rich, or successful and losers, or popular and unpopular, boss and employee, blue-collar and white-collar, etc. Sports-wise, we have winners and losers, local and national rankings, etc. Sociologically and behaviorally we have our respective ideas of what is good or bad behavior, and what is functional and non-functional behaviors, healthy or unhealthy attitudes, mature and immature, we also have ordinal rankings of human development: baby, infant, child, aolescent, adult, and familia-wise we have parent and child, etc.

Each of these differentiators are vulnerable to judgementalism, but not necessarily so. Someone who has scholarly attainments, can CHOOSE to view that attainment in self-aggrandizing and self-worth ways in relation to others, and judge those who have not attained what one has, as of lesser worth. Or, one can simply CHOOSE to view it as one having achieved a goal of self-betterment, and as a way of improving one's capasity to contribute to society. A professor with a Phd. may use his/her station as an emblem of greater worth, or the student seeing it as indicative of their haveing lesser worth. Or, they each may view it as a means for educationally benefiting humankind.

Besides, even were these differentiators to be vulnerable to judgementalism, does that mean that they should be discarded because of it? And, if so, may we not be sacrificing the wealth of good that may result from human growth, development, and progression (as identified by descripters deliniating measurable differentiations), for what little supposed benefit may be derived from avoiding judgementalism in those ways?

I don't believe so.

Thanks, -Wade Engund-

[_wenglund]

The new leaf that I have turned, in terms of judgementalism, is to be less inclined to find and judge fault (whether in cases involving the Church or not), and more inclined to find and implement improvements--I.e. look at things in terms of problem/solution, rather than blame. And, in terms of problems and solution, my new leaf also entails focusing more inward, on how I can improve myself, rather than externally, on what other can do to improve themselves.

I have found this new leaf, in striving to be less judgemental, to have already yeilded benefits to me as well as those I have been judgemental towards. And, I would commend the same to one and all (whether in or out of the Chruch). What better time to change over to this new leaf than in Spring, when trees of all types are undergoing the same.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Well good for you. bravo.

Just one suggestion, if I may: You might find more success if you weren't so condescending - a.k.a., judgemental. ;)

Could you please provide me with what you believe to be an example of my alleged "condescension" so that I can reasonably and openmindedly determine if it is an actual case of me being condescending (judgemental) or you misreading condescension into what I said (perhaps because of your own condescension and judgementalism), so that I can make the necessary improvement if warranted. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Mister Scratch]

Then I misspoke. I think the church encourages judging in certain areas. I do not believe the church is more or less prone to judgmentalism than other similar religious groups.

That's the point I was trying to make earlier. Anyone who's made out to be 'more special' than everyone else, is inevitably going to have some degree of judgmentalism. Whether you're Mormon, muslim, a scientologist, etc.

I am not familiar with the "more special" notion within my faith--having no recollection of it being espoused by any of the General Authorities. Perhaps you could provide some examples.

I am, though, aware of notions like "chosen people" and "worthiness" espoused with the Church which may be interpreted by certain members (though not all, and thus not "inevitably") as a license for at least some degree of judgementalism.

With all due respect, Wade, I think you are misunderstanding the point. The "more special" notion WK is referring to has to do with a certain cultural attitude, I think.

But, the same may be true of a broad range of differentiators (secular and religious), particularly those of an ordinal nature. For example, we have the grading system in public schools, grade levels, graduations and degrees.

How is this even remotely the same? School grades are merit-based evaluations. They are given based on performance, not on some prescribed notion of morality or "worthiness."

We also have socio-economic distinctions: poor, middle-class, and rich, or successful and losers, or popular and unpopular, boss and employee, blue-collar and white-collar, etc. Sports-wise, we have winners and losers, local and national rankings, etc. Sociologically and behaviorally we have our respective ideas of what is good or bad behavior, and what is functional and non-functional behaviors, healthy or unhealthy attitudes, mature and immature, we also have ordinal rankings of human development: baby, infant, child, aolescent, adult, and familia-wise we have parent and child, etc.

Yes, and which of these are mandated by divine fiat? Further, I'm not sure which of these things features the sort of petty "thou art less valiant for wearing two earrings" judgmentalism that is found in Mormonism.

Each of these differentiators are vulnerable to judgementalism, but not necessarily so. Someone who has scholarly attainments, can CHOOSE to view that attainment in self-aggrandizing and self-worth ways in relation to others, and judge those who have not attained what one has, as of lesser worth. Or, one can simply CHOOSE to view it as one having achieved a goal of self-betterment, and as a way of improving one's capasity to contribute to society. A professor with a Phd. may use his/her station as an emblem of greater worth, or the student seeing it as indicative of their haveing lesser worth. Or, they each may view it as a means for educationally benefiting humankind.

I think your analogy is quite a ways off, Wade. What you are calling "worth" is really more knowledge, or more training. Your analogy really breaks down when you apply it to medicine: Does the experienced surgeon have more 'worth' than the med school student? Is it okay for you, as the patient, to be 'judgmental' about this sort of thing?

The point is that I think we are light years away from the kind of judgmentalism inherent in a bishop telling a girl she is "walking pornography."

Besides, even were these differentiators to be vulnerable to judgementalism, does that mean that they should be discarded because of it? And, if so, may we not be sacrificing the wealth of good that may result from human growth, development, and progression (as identified by descripters deliniating measurable differentiations), for what little supposed benefit may be derived from avoiding judgementalism in those ways?

I don't believe so.

Thanks, -Wade Engund-

No one is claiming that the Church ought to be "discarded"; rather, the question is whether or not Mormon-specific judgmentalism is A) a reality (and we seem to all have agreed that it is), and B) if anything can be done about it, and C) whether it is petty or not. I believe that the sort of judgmentalism stemming from ridiculous counsel such as "thou shalt not wear two earrings," or "thou shalt not hang out or tease thy hair" is indeed petty, and that it is an ugly and institutionalized facet of the Church.

Let me ask you this, Wade: Do you consider LDS shunning to be a form of judgmentalism?

[_Mister Scratch]

The new leaf that I have turned, in terms of judgementalism, is to be less inclined to find and judge fault (whether in cases involving the Church or not), and more inclined to find and implement improvements--I.e. look at things in terms of problem/solution, rather than blame. And, in terms of problems and solution, my new leaf also entails focusing more inward, on how I can improve myself, rather than externally, on what other can do to improve themselves.

I have found this new leaf, in striving to be less judgemental, to have already yeilded benefits to me as well as those I have been judgemental towards. And, I would commend the same to one and all (whether in or out of the Chruch). What better time to change over to this new leaf than in Spring, when trees of all types are undergoing the same.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Well good for you. bravo.

Just one suggestion, if I may: You might find more success if you weren't so condescending - a.k.a., judgemental. ;)

Could you please provide me with what you believe to be an example of my alleged "condescension" so that I can reasonably and openmindedly determine if it is an actual case of me being condescending (judgemental) or you misreading condescension into what I said (perhaps because of your own condescension and judgementalism), so that I can make the necessary improvement if warranted. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Here you go, Wade:

I applaud your choice in spending more time with your family and for endevouring to do those things that will add real meaning and value to your life. That, I believe, will serve you far better than publically denegrating and bludgeoning my sacred faith and leaders by uncharitably proclaiming, among other things, them to be a lie, a fraud, not acting in good faith, and so forth. Doing the former will bring out the best in you, while doing the latter exposes the not-so-good in you. The former will help improve the quality of your life, while the latter will taint and degrade you and those towards whom your denegrating is directed. The former will keep the focus where you would like (towards the health and welfare of your family), and not where you dislike (on you).

In fact, you were called on it by Rollo:

You really can be a condescending jerk. If the above diatribe is reflective of your "sacred faith," then you are the antithesis of a follower of Christ.

[_Who Knows]

I had a post typed out, but Scratch pretty much covered it.

I already gave you examples earlier as to why Mormons think they're more special than everyone else. See my post about special protective garments, the priesthood, the holy ghost, the protection that they all provide, the belief that they'll be gods one day, etc.

And I would just add something to what scratch wrote.

Wade gave a bunch of differentiators. I would just say that in my mind, religion is especially bad, as the reasons for someones belief that they're superior is based on a fairy tale, and not reality.