The Millennials simplified.

[_Morley]

I actually didn't disagree out of hand with your assessment. I agree generally with your thought that " it's an uphill battle [for intellectuals] in the present environment generated within Mormonism itself." This makes me wonder if the current climate is better or worse than, say, the environment B.H. Roberts or John A. Widtsoe (or Orson Pratt, if we want to go further back) were under. I think, personally, that in some ways things are better now, and in other ways they were better then for intellectuals in the Church.

I'm not sure what you mean by your suggestion that the current climate for intellectuals might be better, or might be worse, than that of Roberts' time. How would it be better? How would it be worse?

Perhaps you can explain what you mean by using an example. You've obviously been following the discussion of the Bayes Theorem paper. How would that paper fit in?

I'm trying to understand what you're saying.

[_Lemmie]

It's certainly not obvious that keeping the kids in the church, and bringing in unrelated converts after brief acquaintance, are related abilities. If one considers sales as a somewhat similar endeavor to evangelism, then I'm sure there have been many successful salespeople who alienated their children, and many parents whose children stayed close to them who never struck it rich in sales.

The Type A and B postulate is not based on any serious thinking about how conversion and retention may work for individuals and families. While that is obviously a weakness in the postulate, in a way it is also a strength. The empirical data seem to show startlingly steady linear growth over a whole generation, during which the church more than doubled in size. So a whole lot of everything that was happening in church numbers, over a whole generation, was this steady linear growth. Data that simple and striking might still somehow be due to a conspiracy of many complex factors, but to fall back on that lazy assumption would be irresponsible until we've looked really hard for some single, simple cause.

The very fact that church growth over a generation has combined conversions and births, and yet has stayed so steadily linear, suggests that evangelism and retention may not really be so different after all. Conversion and baptism of children both add some number of new Mormons each year. We have to ask seriously whether both those growth mechanisms are effectively controlled by one common factor which has somehow stayed constant between 1990 and 2015. I agree that the existence of such a common factor would be surprising, but I think the surprising data of church growth compel us to look for it.

The fairly constant total changes per year during that time period, while the underlying components moved around a little have led me to consider that there is at least one or several categories that someone has some subjective control over, and those numbers adjust in order to keep a fairly consistent total change. Somehow the plan for many years was to keep at least a certain absolute change each year, without realizing how odd that would look after a decade or so. (Credit goes to Gadiantion for suggesting this idea, on the basis of goals missionaries face, and the creative methods often used to make sure that some absolute number gets met, month after month after month.)

So yes, I am suggesting goal-oriented fraud which, combined with obedient TBM employees, leads to physics guy's possible mechanism that allows the total changes to be "controlled by one common factor which has somehow stayed constant between 1990 and 2015."

[_Gadianton]

Now you're telling me I would have gone straight from being overworked in life to being overworked in death

I'm telling you it's far worse than that. I think there are a few figures in Greek myth that got a similar fate, but here's one (from wiki), Tantalus.

He was made to stand in a pool of water beneath a fruit tree with low branches, with the fruit ever eluding his grasp, and the water always receding before he could take a drink.

It's not just being overworked, but overworked at a task where the reward predictably eludes you. Pain with no gain.

BUT -- my recast is against the grain. Most people heard what they were intended to hear: "lower your expectations for the work in this life". Knowing that people aren't joining the Church in the next life where they know they are dead, and they can narrow down the faiths that taught the present circumstance, they still refuse to listen. This blocks the worry many TBMs have that it might not be true if people aren't joining. He was subtly trying to sell the idea that this has no bearing, because people don't join anyway, even when they for all intents and purpose have to believe it's true. It was a recast of the old "pray that you don't see an angel" logic.

[_Gadianton]

I apologize fetchface, when I said, "I'm telling you it's far worse than that. I think there are a few figures in Greek myth that got a similar fate, but here's one (from wiki), Tantalus" I drastically underestimated. It's far worse than Tantalus. But I have to go now if someone wants to guess what I'm thinking. (I'm sure there could be other reasons too, but curious if anyone sees it the same way)

[_Physics Guy]

So yes, I am suggesting goal-oriented fraud which, combined with obedient TBM employees, leads to physics guy's possible mechanism that allows the total changes to be "controlled by one common factor which has somehow stayed constant between 1990 and 2015."

Right—this is the other hypothesis, that the numbers are fudged, and I actually think it's the more likely one.

Something evidently did go wrong around 1990 such that the previous exponential growth stalled, or there would have been no need to fudge anything. Imagining what might have gone wrong, on the assumption that the published numbers are accurate, is at least a way of challenging oneself to think boldly about possible causes. That's my excuse, anyway. I like taking hypotheses and pushing them as far as they'll go.

Lemmie's reminder is good, though, that the whole Type A and B thing should not be taken too seriously, because the chances are high that the uncanny steadiness of the growth is just fake.

[_Gadianton]

I apologize fetchface, when I said, "I'm telling you it's far worse than that. I think there are a few figures in Greek myth that got a similar fate, but here's one (from wiki), Tantalus" I drastically underestimated. It's far worse than Tantalus. But I have to go now if someone wants to guess what I'm thinking. (I'm sure there could be other reasons too, but curious if anyone sees it the same way)

Sorry to leave everyone hanging. The reason why the fate of Tantalus isn't as bad is because like Charlie Brown and Lucy, where Charlie Brown is suckered into trying to kick the football again (and for those who aren't Peanuts scholars, Lucy always pulls the football away and Charlie Brown lands on his back, defeated again) it might be a hard fate, but neither Tantalus nor Charlie Brown are aware it's their fate. They don't have the global information about their fate that we do. In the case of missionary work in the spirit world, we're told on good authority that it's essentially hopeless, and so we go into the situation knowing that it's hopeless, but expected to act naïvely enthusiastic about it anyway. A Mormon Tantalus would be told exactly what's going on with the resources receding from his grasp, and he would be expected to try his darndest anyway, and he would be monitored, and told that if he didn't go to task with the enthusiasm of a puppy dog, if he shirked the least bit, then he would inherit a worse fate than presently experiencing.

But the problem is, if he fulfills his duty, he makes it to the next level of progression. But it wouldn't be progression without an even greater challenge and greater psychological contortions, now would it!

Anyway, one reason why I seriously advise moinmoin to dispose his scriptures to the flames and move on in life is that all scripture and revelation, at least scripture and revelation in the West where God means what he says, is that all scripture suffers from a severe defect: it doesn't take into account how incentives change and agents update their expectations based on what the scriptures say. "But we can't just just bless those who curse us because our enemies aren't stupid, they know the Bible says we have to do that and so they're waiting to take advantage of us!" or "Doesn't Satan know that the D&C says evil spirits will always try to shake hands and so wouldn't he at least take that into account next time he tries to deceive somebody?"

No. The scriptures assume your enemies are stupid and that Satan is Doctor Evil from Austin Powers. And they assume you are stupid (naïve, fulfill the trope knowing the trope). Not my problem, I didn't write them so don't blame me. You can try to go all metaphorical and nuanced to escape the madness but that's just a way of saying revelation really isn't revelation, and you can do all that without having the revealed word of God.

[_DrW]

Hi moin,

My "barnacles" analogy was actually more directed at attending members who *don't* accept callings, *don't* pay tithing, don't really live the gospel program in the home,

That's fine, but my point still stands with that update. Where is the ship going such that these members are causing a problem getting there? Your frustration with them not doing their share I will take up at the end, I literally have a revelation for you.

It isn't a matter of getting anywhere in a hurry. Rather, it's about the barnacles ceasing to be barnacles for their own sakes. Not operating at potential and living under privileges is spiritually harmful, causes cogdis, and is a drag on the people themselves.

*cough*. Moin, buddy, we're all friends here, okay? No stress to be perfect, and so no need for post-hoc interpretations that obviously had nothing to do with what you originally meant. I mean, it's a nice save, if this is how you wish to think about it going forward.

Can you expand on this? It isn't implicit to me . . . Nor, do I think it's self-evident.

well, you said:

Yes, the body of the Church shrinks under that scenario (so, no more touting Rodney Stark predictions), but the Church is also stronger. In many ways, it was stronger before it collected the drag-inducing barnacles of uncommitted members.

All I meant was losing the barnacles shrinks the church, implying that the ship isn't thrusting forward in terms of membership, which implies missionary work is stagnant to negative.

Now, about your frustration with active members who don't pull their weight. I recently received the words of a high ranking GA along with several others where the sentiments were a little more candid than I've heard in official settings. Specifically to your point, he assured us based on revelation that the work in the spirit world is just as difficult as it is here, and that you will be working there, essentially, nonstop. And so even in the words of one of the very elect, the ship is going nowhere, no matter how hard you row. He didn't specify beyond the resurrection, but until then, for hundreds if not thousands of years, it seems as if you are doomed to a life of thankless labor. I think you have few options here, moin. I personally recommend grabbing a putty knife and scraping yourself off the bottom and be free. But should you chose to go the distance, I recommend that like unto Paul, that you learn to rejoice in your afflictions.

Dean Robbers,

You have provided keen insight and truly sage advice here. Reading responses from you, FM, IHAQ and others to moinmoin on this thread gives a calm assurance that those of use who have detached ourselves from Mormonism have taken an important step in improving our lives, and in many cases, the lives of our family members, whether or not they choose to follow.

[_I have a question]

moinmoin has the analogy backwards - we are the ship, and are well rid of the drag-inducing barnacle of a Church. That’s what the millennials have realised, it is the Church that holds the members back.

[_moksha]

Will losing uncommitted members get your kids higher grades or better jobs?

The tithing must flow and it does not hurt to have a huge surplus in the tithing melange. The barnacle drag coefficient affects the absolute rate of tithing melange production. With sufficient melange, the Brethren can fold even better real estate deals.

Hope that helps.

[_Maksutov]

It can be even tougher for intellectuals.

Yes, it can. But, doesn't have to be. And isn't always.

Just keep sucking down those Givens books. And calling those who doubt the rock in the hat barnacles.