A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
Post Reply
_Maksutov
_Emeritus
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:19 pm

Re: A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

Post by _Maksutov »

DrW wrote:
TheCCC wrote:You've never heard of Bruce R. McConkie's ill named "Mormon Doctrine"?

McConkie's "Mormon Doctrine" was found on a bookshelf in the home of every faithful Latter Day Saint when I was a kid. It was practically considered one of the Standard Works - right along with Talmage's "Jesus the Christ".

From the first edition in 1958, to well into the 80s, McConkie was the "go to" reference for what Mormons were supposed to believe on all kinds of issues.

Then, much like "The Miracle of Forgiveness" that came later, folks began to realize what fundamentalist, dogmatic, intolerant, racist, sexist, and downright ridiculous, content was to be found between the covers.

If you think an essential 30-year process of rejection of a work never presented for ratification or a sustaining vote of the membership by the prophet of the Church is an example of effective peer review then, again, you have an insufficient grip on the subject matter at hand.


Great memories, DrW. I converted in 1973, and Mormon Doctrine, A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, Jesus the Christ were pillars of my new faith. When I encountered Nibley I thought he was quite a BSer, but all my peers oohed and ahhed over him. They also praised Neal Maxwell and Paul Dunn, while I found them superficial. I think some of my admiration of Talmage was that he was an accomplished scientist and defender of evolution. While B.H. Roberts was an earlier generation, he was another giant for me.

Sadly there are nothing of their ilk now. Mormon theology and faithful history are in tatters. Some of the new faithful historians like Bushman and Bradley are engaging with some of the issues, but I see also the tendency to finesse away the problems with romantic reimaginings of Mormonism, a la Teryl Givens. :wink:
"God" is the original deus ex machina. --Maksutov
_DrW
_Emeritus
Posts: 7222
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:57 am

Re: A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

Post by _DrW »

The CCC wrote:Just found something that might interest you concerning BYU. LDS aren't as antiscience as you like to believe,
SEE https://news.BYU.edu/news/byu-named-one ... nnovations

Not sure why you think that the ability of LDS university faculty and students to make money off of innovation means that the basic tenets of Mormonism are less anti-science.

What it means is that either the faculty and staff involved have a high tolerance for cog dis, or more likely, they are simply unaware of how diametrically opposed the fundamentals of science are to Mormonism's foundational teachings and scriptures.

For the record, I have worked with (and/or mentored) BYU graduates who went on to commercial success in innovation. Some of them have done quite well for themselves.

In each case, I can tell you for a certainty that these individuals did not believe in the Book of Mormon, and thought that many other aspects of the Mormonism were anything from silly to ridiculous. They remained active for the sake of their families, believing that the LDS environment was good for their children, and for social reasons.

This was in the 1980s and 1990s. Today, some of these individuals, and many more of their children, are no longer active in the LDS Church.
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."

DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
_DrW
_Emeritus
Posts: 7222
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:57 am

Re: A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

Post by _DrW »

DrW wrote:
For the record, I have worked with (and/or mentored) BYU graduates who went on to commercial success in innovation. Some of them have done quite well for themselves.

After posting this ^, I felt inspired to try to follow up on a couple of the companies of individuals from BYU with whom I worked to see how they were doing after all these years.

Wouldn't you know it - the first one I googled has since been a defendant in a patent infringement lawsuit brought by a major player in the industry. This mess eventually involved BYU, the patent assignee (owner). Won't say much more about the case because additional information could allow in real life identification of the individuals involved.

Let us just say that the whole mess did not reflect well on BYU as a Church university or a center for technology innovation.

(One would expect real innovation companies to be plaintiffs, and not defendants, in such actions.)
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."

DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
_Philo Sofee
_Emeritus
Posts: 6660
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:04 am

Re: A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

Post by _Philo Sofee »

DrW wrote:
huckelberry wrote:Dr W, I agree with you that thinking that god did it is an idea that does not explain or understand how anything works and has no place in science. I think it is also so thin that it does not qualify as religion either.

I still hold the view that science and religion are different activities acting in their own purview.

Huckleberry,

Do you mean like non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA)?

NOMA has been pretty thoroughly discredited. The problem is that religion (and especially Mormonism) makes affirmative, objective statements that can be scientifically evaluated, or tested, for validity. When so tested, most are falsified.


Like Nibley saying Joseph Smith never pretended to know Egyptian which we can scientifically test by simply reading Facsimile 3 and see what he said about the Egyptian. Truly! Joseph Smith made direct empirical claims which science can and has tested. Even falling back on testimony doesn't save the religious claims anymore. Credibility has sunk to all time lows.
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."
_AmyJo
_Emeritus
Posts: 1288
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 4:23 am

Re: A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

Post by _AmyJo »

So too a hatred of Intellectualism, Feminism, Homosexuality, fundamental Human Rights.
_SPG
_Emeritus
Posts: 527
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 12:47 am

Re: A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

Post by _SPG »

Science is like Kung Fu. Some people have strong Kung Fu, some don't.

Science is the art of observation and application. Some do it better than others.

Religion in general is trying to achieve something quite separate then academic science, but their science is still quite strong.
_DrW
_Emeritus
Posts: 7222
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:57 am

Re: A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

Post by _DrW »

SPG wrote:Science is like Kung Fu. Some people have strong Kung Fu, some don't.

Science is the art of observation and application. Some do it better than others.

Religion in general is trying to achieve something quite separate then academic science, but their science is still quite strong.

Okay. That does it.

Celestial Forum notwithstanding, the above have to be three of the most ridiculous "insights" to ever appear in one post in the history of the board. The fact that it's a three-insight post qualifies it as pure nonsense.

Who is this guy?
Last edited by Guest on Sat Jun 10, 2017 9:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."

DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
_Maksutov
_Emeritus
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:19 pm

Re: A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

Post by _Maksutov »

DrW wrote:
SPG wrote:Science is like Kung Fu. Some people have strong Kung Fu, some don't.

Science is the art of observation and application. Some do it better than others.

Religion in general is trying to achieve something quite separate then academic science, but their science is still quite strong.

Okay. That does it.

Celestial Forum notwithstanding, the above have to be three of the most ridiculous sentences to ever appear in one post in the history of the board. The fact that it's a three sentence post qualifies it as pure nonsense.

Who is this guy?
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Franktalk's soul brother. The woo industry caters to these guys, DrW, and it's more exciting and has more celebrities than those creepy mean ole empiricists. Science is a mere cult and con jobs while dudes who have profound feelings rule. Ergo, SPG.

Seriously, we regularly see these kind of Eloi parasitical types nowadays. But they're stimulating the economy, because pseudoscience above all things is a commercial enterprise. I find it more pernicious even than religion lately. :eek:
"God" is the original deus ex machina. --Maksutov
_SPG
_Emeritus
Posts: 527
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 12:47 am

Re: A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

Post by _SPG »

SPG wrote:Science is like Kung Fu. Some people have strong Kung Fu, some don't.

Science is the art of observation and application. Some do it better than others.

Religion in general is trying to achieve something quite separate then academic science, but their science is still quite strong.



Maksutov wrote:
DrW wrote:Okay. That does it.

Celestial Forum notwithstanding, the above have to be three of the most ridiculous sentences to ever appear in one post in the history of the board. The fact that it's a three sentence post qualifies it as pure nonsense.

Who is this guy?
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Franktalk's soul brother. The woo industry caters to these guys, DrW, and it's more exciting and has more celebrities than those creepy mean ole empiricists. Science is a mere cult and con jobs while dudes who have profound feelings rule. Ergo, SPG.

Seriously, we regularly see these kind of Eloi parasitical types nowadays. But they're stimulating the economy, because pseudoscience above all things is a commercial enterprise. I find it more pernicious even than religion lately. :eek:


What I have noticed, other then I get compared to FrankTalk a lot, is that many people think they can "own a term" such as science, marriage, religion, truth, salvation, God, etc. These are universal terms that anyone can use to express an idea.

But lets take the science of religion, for example, even looking at cults. You usually have a very common and consistent element called a cult leader. He plays people's guilt, fear, desire for forgiveness, etc. It's very scientific. You can make a recipe of a cult leader, and recipe for a cult member.

But it goes beyond that. Why does the human psyche need salvation, forgiveness, purpose, etc? In answering this question, academic science pretty much drops the ball, calling it all nonsense. Yet, the most important element of any human is their identity. A mother cannot love her child unless she is a mother, and "mother" is part of identity. A woman can love any child, but there must still be a reason coded into her identity. A good woman might love many children, but then we must define what a good woman is, and what is a bad woman, etc. A bad woman might hate children in general.

Identity is king of motivation in human. Who we are, is everything to us. And yes, mock me if you want, but there is a science to how identity works. Over thousands of years, in trying to define ourselves, we have involved Gods and other worldly realms. We admit those realms are not physical, but rather are spiritual. They are more idealistic. Plato called first named these realms, The Realm of Forms. Such as, there is no such thing as a "True Triangle" in our physical world, but we make things that "look like triangles." Triangles are very scientific, but they are an ideal that will probably never be perfected in our universe. But, we can express them in math form to give people that general idea, and we use the ideas in our projects.

While what we deem as "academic science" is teaching ideas like triangles and curves, religion teaches other ideas that are also truth. Religion teaches ideas like marriage, honor, honesty, patience, steadfastness, motherhood, fatherhood, etc. These ideas are more important to enter heaven.

I was just watching a TED talk yesterday about a EMT Medic He talked about how he had watched many people die. Many would've course ask him, "Am I going to die?" At first he tried to lie to them because he didn't want to upset them, but eventually started telling them the truth. He said, that a pattern became very clear as people realized that they were going to die.

1. Wanted forgiveness.
2. Wished they had done more good to be remembered by.
3. Wanted loved ones to know they were loved.

Note that I didn't say they wished they had taken more science classes, or earned more money.

When the final curtain falls, what people wish they had, is more religion. They wish they had been more kind, been more loved, had more friends, more confidence that they would be remembered.

Granted, this is at the end of a person's life. You might argue, that doesn't have anything to do with how they live. But to me, this says that in our heart of hearts, what we really want from life, is what we wish we had when we die.

This is actually very scientific, and I think it makes good sense. For how many thousands of years have priests watched people die, hearing their desires, and tried to prepare people for that moment?

I will say, that the doctor that told this story, made a point to say "everyone" acted like this. So it wasn't just the Christians falling back on their religious fear. When we check out of this game, we want to be good people.
_Maksutov
_Emeritus
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:19 pm

Re: A Hatred of Science is Killing the Church

Post by _Maksutov »

Good for you, SPG. Believe whatever you want. But your sloppy use of language and concepts and your lack of interest in actually researching any of the subjects you opine on makes you, to use a DrW word, ridiculous.

You can go on mangling the terms and the concepts and redefine everything in sight but to what purpose? I guess to have something to say. It looks to me like you are unable to recognize that others have already studied the subjects you refer to and have come up with a lot of answers and even quite a bit of evidence for various propositions. But you would rather stay in the gray areas where pseudoscience and cults thrive, Your choice. :biggrin:
"God" is the original deus ex machina. --Maksutov
Post Reply