Assuring a successful life journey

[_Roger Morrison]

Hi Wade, thanks for you bit of bio. I think i now know you a little better... I think i even like You more :-)

I tend to think such "self-help" regimentations 'often' serve the purposes of the gurus who sell the seminars, IMSCO.

I think folks are better served by understanding the "whys" in "themselves" and the 'forces' that they personally respond(ed) to. In so doing one understands they have NOT failed--nor are they victims--therefor they have little reason to self-depricate. With this more positive sense they are better equiped to--IF they so aspire--modify attitudes, reactions and responses to life's challenges...

But it is interesting to play, "What-if???" No question things would be different. The answer to the question, "would they have been better?'' is strictly conjecture.

I'm glad you've enjoyed (i conclude) Your life. Many haven't... Warm regards, Roger

[_Roger Morrison]

Hi Dart, a very insightful & good post. The example you site of the "Lady with the jar"...

I think she corrupted it for poor-purpose. My first reading, a year or so ago exemplified filling life with activities etc that really don't account for much in the long run--i forget the details--but the 'water' was a good cup of coffee with friends that really tops up life. I like that one better...

Thanks... Warm regards, Roger

[_wenglund]

I like those questions Wade!

I'm an unbeliever and wonder how the restored gospel of Christ does provide answers to those questions?

For me, among many things, the restored gospel of Christ adds a new dimension to the equation (i.e. the spiritual), it extends the journey beyond this life (taking it from the finite to the eternal by considering both pre-mortality and post-mortality), it explains and elevates the purpose if life (i.e. to attain a physical body and grow in faith and righteousness so as to eventually be resurrected and become glorified and perfected even as our Father in heaven), it suggests a worthy destination, and heightens the significance and meaning of that destination, and it provides much of the means for reaching that destination (see below). In short, it provides much of the framework for the answers to the questions.

Briefly, here are my answers to the questions:

1) Where am I going--I.e. what is my main objective and destination? Godly love, joy, happiness.
2) Why am I going there--I.e. what is my motivation and purpose? To fulfill the measure of my creation by become Christ-like.
3) Who all is going with me? Those who are converted to, and continue to grow in faith in the restored gospel of Christ.
4) How will we get there?
a) What guidance and navigational tools are needed? My secular and religious epistemics, instructional material, teachers, role models, and the Holy Spirit.
b) What measurement, evaluation, and assessment tools will be needed? ibid.
c) What is the best route to take? Following the path that Christ walked and set forth.
d) What is the best mode of transportation? Family and Church organizations as well as secular schools and democratic governments and social organizations.
e) What supplies are needed? A strong work ethic, a penative disposition, and generous amounts of humility and meakness--i.e. a willing and able mind and heart.
f) What resources will we need to utilize along the way? Both secular and religious instructional services, health and medical services, leadership, efficacious relationships, etc.
g) What do we need to do to pay for all of this? Certain key elements have already been paid for by Christ, and the rest may be covered by the sweat of the brow and a broken heart and contrite spirit that engender willing and edifying obedience to the laws and commandments, compliance with the principles and ordinances, and enduring to the end.

My answers to the remaining questions are dynamic and personal, the specifics of which are best kept private. Suffice it to say that my life has progressed much more successfully now that I have been more mindful and attentive to all these questions.

I hope this helps. Thanks, -Wade Englund-[/b]

[Gadianton]

Do you agree that this is a viable way to help assure a successful life journey?

No.

What is successful? What might be considered successful to a Mormon is not successful to an atheist or Baptist.

If you look more carefully at my question above, as well as the series of questions it refers to, you will see that they each are generic, and not Mormon specific. And, if you read through the thread you will see that non-Mormons have answered the questions--which should also suggest to the reasonable mind that my questions were generic, and thus could be useful to athiests or Baptists. So, I am not sure where you are coming from on this.

If you don't think the generic questions are a viable way to assure a successful life journey (regardless of religious/non-religious orientation), then what way do you think is viable?

Do you agree that for believers, particularly in terms of the spiritual/eternal aspect of life's journey, the restored gospel of Christ provides viable answers to many of these questions?

Naturally. But then again, the Church creates more questions than the average person would even imagine. It then places extreme emphasis and importance on these questions, thus teaching its adherents to be extremely dependent on the Church for answers. It is a control mechanism like so many other aspects of the Church.

I suppose that to those with a contol-oriented mindset, it may appear that way. However, to those of us who can distinguish between dependence and interdependance, and who can recognize that for each of the questions the individual agents are free to CHOOSE for themselves which answers to accept or reject, and that responsibility for the planning and implementation (particularly in terms of the details) ultimately rest on the shoulders of each individual, will view the questions as providing healthy and helpful levels of guidance, structure, and assistance, and not control--except perhaps self-control.

Incidentally, your post reminded me of Dan Peterson’s recent claim that only Mormonism teaches that families are forever. That Christians generally reject this notion, is just a popular myth in LDS thought. But Dan’s intention was to persuade people into thinking this obvious truth is rejected by the rest of Christianity; therefore the LDS Church is needed.

Even were you to have correctly interpreted Dr. Peterson's remarks (from what I have seen of your track record, there is great room for considerable doubt), I don't see any significant connection. If you think I am suggesting that my series of questions are the exclusive domain of Mormonism, then you are quite mistaken. I actually got the basic elements for my templet from a secular course on Instructional Design in Special Education. I trust that I can find similar modes of thinking in secular self-help and life-coaching books, if not also vacation planning materials of all strips. So, you are way off again on this one.

Try thinking of my templet in this way: the questions are generic, whereas the answers are interdependant upon each individuals personal world view, and for many (though not all) Mormons, the answers are interdependant on Mormonism. Does that help?

If so, what does that mean for those who may lose faith and become unbelievers?

I suspect that most unbelievers realize that one shouldn’t lose sleep over these particular questions. The Mormon culture is a paradigm of micro-management of one’s life. From Stephen Covey’s 7 habits to the Franklin planner, Mormons are constantly reminded to micro-manage their lives in accordance with the Church.

As previously mentioned, the questions only provide a limited amount of structure, and allow the individuals a broad latitude of flexibility on how they, personally, may CHOOSE to answer them--whether in great detail and rigidity, or fairly spontaneous and creative, or various permutations inbetween. So, you again confuse the questions, themsleves, with how a certain select group of people (not all LDS, and not all who are LDS) may CHOOSE to answer them. Hopefully, you correctly understand now.

It is already common knowledge that Mormons are generally a stressed out group, and I think this constant reminder in Mormonism that one has not done enough, repented enough, or prayed enough, plays a huge part in this. Your post is, in my view, a perfect example of what I am talking about.

Again, the limited structure of the questions, themselves, are stress neutral. Whatever stress that may or may not result therefrom, is a function of how the individual may CHOOSE to answer them. One may CHOOSE to answer them in the extremest and negative way that you have, and thereby embue their life with stress. Or, one can take a more reasonable, positive, and practical approach, and actual use the questions as a means of stress avoidance or reduction--which is the case with this Mormon (your penchant for stereoutyping Mormons notwithstanding).

(Now I’m thinking of every Mormon I know in Utah who take anti-depressants like Prozac.)

Related to this, I’ll never forget the day we were in Sunday school and a woman brought a huge jar which represented the time we had during the day to do the things we were supposed to be doing. She filled it with big white rocks. She then asked, doesn’t it seem like your time is used up? She then pours marbles into it, and shakes it around to make sure they all fit in there. She then dumps a liter of rice, and again shakes it around until it all settles. Then just when you thought your day was full, she dumped a liter of water into the jar, completely filling it up. The lesson? Procrastination, and doing all the things you’re supposed to be doing, even if you feel as though there isn’t enough time in the day to do all that the Church requires.

There again the students are still free to interpret the analogy and it message in varying ways, and to varying degrees and extents. They can view it in a positive and practical way as sound advise for improvement, or they can view it in a negative and extreme way as a guilt trip. Not coincidentally, your way of thinking lent itself to the latter interpretation, whereas this Mormon interpreted it quite the opposite--your penchant for stereotyping Mormons notwithstanding. (Which, I would hope, would give you at least some indication where the problem may lie, though given your seemingly staunch resistent to open and honest introspection, is unlikely. But, hope springs eternal.)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

Hi Wade, thanks for you bit of bio. I think I now know you a little better... I think I even like You more :-)

I tend to think such "self-help" regimentations 'often' serve the purposes of the gurus who sell the seminars, IMSCO.

I have a much less cynical view. To me, were the so-called "regimentations" not to serve the purpose of the customer in the marketplace of ideas, then those "regimentations" wouldn't sell--or at least wouldn't continue to sell, which would not serve the purposes (whatever that may be) of the "gurus". Such is the nature of ideational economics. ;-)

I think folks are better served by understanding the "whys" in "themselves" and the 'forces' that they personally respond(ed) to. In so doing one understands they have NOT failed--nor are they victims--therefor they have little reason to self-depricate. With this more positive sense they are better equiped to--IF they so aspire--modify attitudes, reactions and responses to life's challenges...

That is an interesting "regimentation" you are trying to sell. But, before I buying into it, it would help to know a little more about it--perhaps by comparing and contrasting it to my so-called "regimentation". I am open to differing points of view and different approaches to life's journey, and if your approach is more advantagious, then I would be pleased to buy and use it.

But it is interesting to play, "What-if???" No question things would be different. The answer to the question, "would they have been better?'' is strictly conjecture.

I'm glad you've enjoyed (I conclude) Your life. Many haven't... Warm regards, Roger

I hope you know that the sentiment is mutual.

By the way, in answer to your previous question about when to introduce my decisionmaking templete to children, I think they can be introduced to it very early in child development, though not by way of answering each of the question on an individual (per child) basis, but as a family as a whole, with the parents taking the predominate role in the process. In this way, the effectual decisionmaking processes inherent in my template will be modeled for the children, thereby instructionally inculcating them with a funtional life strategy, and better prepare them for when they are ready to make individual choices and ready to answer the questions for themselves.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Roger Morrison]

Hi Wade, thanks for your response. I'll try to answer some of reactions boldly ;-) :

I have a much less cynical view. To me, were the so-called "regimentations" not to serve the purpose of the customer in the marketplace of ideas, then those "regimentations" wouldn't sell--or at least wouldn't continue to sell, which would not serve the purposes (whatever that may be) of the "gurus". Such is the nature of ideational economics. ;-)

RM: That my view is labeled "cynical" by you, surprises me somewhat??? I hope you noted my qualifier "OFTEN" in my assessment??? Am i to believe that the "marketplace" is the best determinate of 'value' and/or 'product quality'??? Ever watched 'Late-Nite-Product-Promotions'??? IF so, do you think them all "Efficatious" services and products, marketed with little thought given to monetary reward???

[/b]

That is an interesting "regimentation" you are trying to sell. But, before I buying into it, it would help to know a little more about it--perhaps by comparing and contrasting it to my so-called "regimentation". I am open to differing points of view and different approaches to life's journey, and if your approach is more advantagious, then I would be pleased to buy and use it.

RM: Do you have a fixation on "selling" and "regimentation" ;-)??? I hardly think i was "selling" "regimentation" by suggesting a person might have the ability to do some turn-arounds by understanding their natures, and their nurturing--from every sector--on their own. In so-saying, i know we each have varying capacities of understanding, and application ability. Nor am i suggesting in the least their is not information available to those motivated from WITHIN; that i consider most important... Not that "inspiration" can't come from/at unexpected moments...

Personal case: In 1976 ;-) on our way home from church :-) we inadvertently happened into the area of a local Marathon--didn't know much about them so watched the "Finish Line" for a while... Wow, running 26 miles!! Then a struggling guy, obviously not in the best condition limped over that line... One could say, "that was a "Spiritual Experience"! If him, why not me? In 1978 i ran THE Honolulu Marathon, my first! That could be considered another "Spiritual Experience"! More personal stuff...

In my very early 20s, (the 50s) Napoleon Hill's Series, "Ten Principles of Success", if i recall correctly, after 50+ years :-), were books that i found encouaraging. You might too?? At the same time i read every book on "House Construction" in my local library while my wife & I squireled away enough to apply for a Credit Union loan to start working on a VERY modest home, 900 sq ft, LOL!! That was many building projects ago...

By the way, in answer to your previous question about when to introduce my decisionmaking templete to children, I think they can be introduced to it very early in child development, though not by way of answering each of the question on an individual (per child) basis, but as a family as a whole, with the parents taking the predominate role in the process. In this way, the effectual decisionmaking processes inherent in my template will be modeled for the children, thereby instructionally inculcating them with a funtional life strategy, and better prepare them for when they are ready to make individual choices and ready to answer the questions for themselves.

RM: I really wasn't aware that you were doing "Market Research" ;-) with your "Template"?? Nor was my question directed at "Product Presentation"... Rather i was thinking 'generically' a person of any stripe being twigged to assess their life's road would had to have started the 'journey'. I guess you might not have been as hypothetical as i imagined you were???

Do you have in mind a "Family Home Evening" style presentation for children??? I hope my ego-trip down memory-lane wasn't too uncalled for? I just wanted to clarify that i am a product of make-over... An ongoing life process...

Warm regards, Roger