Commentary: Discussion on Mormonism

[articulett]

Yes... yes to Ramachandran. The missing limb really feels like it's there-- really! He figured out why. In looking at how the perception conflicted with the known facts, he found out something very important about the brain... knowledge we can take further.

I have trouble communicating known facts with conviction-- I can't imagine proffering opinions as "true knowledge"-- even if I believed them wholeheartedly-- they'd still just be my beliefs to me. If I felt a missing limb, it would be a sign that there was something wrong with me.

A person cannot know what they do not know unless... (and that's where science steps in-- that's where Ramachandran is really good at devising tests to see how perception affects reality.) Our mind is an "interpreting machine"-- and we are the last to know when things aren't working well. We get to know the way humans fool themselves in a way no past humans COULD know.

And some people can't know this, because a brain injury keeps them from learning of the delusions they live under. Clive Wearing is just such an example... he can't make new memories and his brain explains it as that he just woke up from a coma-- and all the explaining in the world won't let him remember this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clive_Wearing
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/m...2.xml&sSheet=/health/2005/01/14/ixhright.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmkiMlvLKto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKxr08GEE54

He's in a perpetual twilight zone... and it's so unfixable... so sad...
But religion does the same thing to people but they do it with the "faith is good; doubt is bad" meme.

Meme infections can be as damaging as a herpes infection to the brain.

 

[rcronk]

articulett - neither of those examples were Mormon doctrine. A bow around the neck? That's silly and has nothing to do with Mormon doctrine. Having a perfect outside and junk inside is also not Mormon doctrine. I have seen this one before in many people, Mormon and non-Mormon. It seems to be rooted in people thinking that they have to compare themselves to others and come out better in order to be loved by God. That's exactly opposite of the doctrine of Christ and you can see the end result of such thinking. The street numbering has nothing to do with religion or temples. When these cities were settled, they had a main street and a center street that crossed at the center of the town. Addresses go north, east, south, and west from the center of town so people didn't need maps to get around. Many towns since then have added named roads, etc.

 

[Kopji]

If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him.

James 1:5 (New International Version)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

This tack seems like a non starter.
Take a look around at the state of the world due to people praying about it and counting on wisdom from God to fill in the gaps. The Book of Mormon is hardly giving original advice.

Religion gives some kinds of behavior a friendly home, but can't turn a free thinking person into a robot. One thing I see as a difference in religions, and maybe Mormonism is worse in this respect - how do we decide or make a choice?

I see most of the issues we come to generally call 'woo', are rooted in flawed abilities to decide or choose between one thing and another.

Some of the all time corrupting influence I ever encountered was Karl Popper's writings - how we increase our knowledge of something by making a conjecture and then refuting it in various ways.

 

[rcronk]

bokonon - God has this weird behavior where He doesn't give things to people to waste it on their own lusts, greed, selfishness, laziness, etc.. That would go counter to the plan of helping us become better people. It's about us progressing and learning, not Him proving He exists.

 

[bokonon]

rcronk, that's a convenient excuse for why "all things" doesn't include winning lottery numbers, but it's hardly persuasive. If a large chunk of cash were delivered to you, it would be up to you whether to spend it on your own lusts, greed, selfishness, laziness, etc., or whether to spend it teaching children in Appalachia to read the Book of Mormon.

 

[RandFan]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clive_Wearing
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/m...2.xml&sSheet=/health/2005/01/14/ixhright.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmkiMlvLKto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKxr08GEE54

He's in a perpetual twilight zone... and it's so unfixable... so sad...
But religion does the same thing to people but they do it with the "faith is good; doubt is bad" meme.

Meme infections can be as damaging as a herpes infection to the brain.

Thank you very much. Something new. I'm assuming you have seen Memento and/or 50 first dates?

 

[articulett]

articulett - neither of those examples were Mormon doctrine. A bow around the neck? That's silly and has nothing to do with Mormon doctrine. Having a perfect outside and junk inside is also not Mormon doctrine. I have seen this one before in many people, Mormon and non-Mormon. It seems to be rooted in people thinking that they have to compare themselves to others and come out better in order to be loved by God. That's exactly opposite of the doctrine of Christ and you can see the end result of such thinking. The street numbering has nothing to do with religion or temples. When these cities were settled, they had a main street and a center street that crossed at the center of the town. Addresses go north, east, south, and west from the center of town so people didn't need maps to get around. Many towns since then have added named roads, etc.

Again you miss the point...

The point is the stuff that you think is good and moral and makes people "better people" is not the same as I think or the same as what is true. The bow around the neck thing came from catholics... but it's a superstition like all religious dogma-- it can be helpful or harmful-- but mostly it's harmful and not true. And my perception is my opinion alone. My friend is the one who told me the city was named in relation to temple square or whatever. I don't care. I just found the whole experience like living in Stepford. I didn't recognize my friend and I didn't want to dress up her daughter and take her shopping... I wanted to learn who the kid was (especially before her religion turned her into someone like her mother whom I no longer recognized-- she was a "stepford wife" to me-- not mean or bad-- just... brainwashed.)

But I shall bow out. I don't think you get my point... or any point that makes you question your religion which you are certain makes you a better person, and I am certain makes you hard headed, arrogant, and sexist.

 

[RandFan]

articulett - neither of those examples were Mormon doctrine. A bow around the neck? That's silly and has nothing to do with Mormon doctrine.

The problem is that Mormonism plays havoc with reason. One cannot question. Backbiting (critisizing leaders) can get you shuned (excomunicated or disfellowshiped). And the Church does not work to correct misconceptions and so they abound.

Since I left the Church I have asked a series of questions of freinds and family and it is astounding how many false concepts are accepted and how many things are assumed to be doctrine that are not.

Ask Mormons if Blacks are decendant of Cain.
Ask Mormons if a person who sheds blood must be put to death (blood doctrine).

 

[Elind]

That's assuming that it's false. Most of what I teach my children is from my own life experiences anyway.

No, what you teach is beliefs, not experiences that can be shared or demonstrated. No doubt if you tell a child often enough that they will hear god, they will eventually do so, just like they know Santa comes in December (Mormons do that too, right?). What you cannot do is have them pick up an extension and listen to your voices, but you could take them fishing and share that.

BTW, I admire your stamina.

 

[rcronk]

RandFan and articulett - I'll give you both an example of what you're trying to tell me (that you don't think I get, but I do). Have you ever seen traffic lights flashing all red in both directions? What usually triggers that is a special secondary program in the traffic signal system. All it does is continuously check the lights to see if green or yellow appears in both directions at the same time - if it ever detects this condition, it takes control and disconnects the main traffic control system because the main system is obviously broken based on the fact that it let green or yellow come up in both directions at once. It is deemed broken and no longer can vote on whether or not it's broken. So there's a main system that controls the lights and a saftey system that is very simple and checks the output on the main system. They work together to detect errors. I do this also with my computer code at work - I write what are called unit tests that test the output of other parts of the system. Every time we make a change, we run the tests and they check to make sure the output of the system falls within allowable required ranges. If it does, we're good. If not, we stop and figure out the problem. In both examples, the main system, once found broken, is not allowed to continue because it cannot be trusted. I think this is like what you both are saying regarding deception detection and a deceived person not being able to detect their own deception. I get the principle. So, to detect error within myself, I have to have something outside of myself check me. This could be another person (if they're also not broken in the exact same way), the Holy Ghost, etc.. Everything done in the LDS church is done in at least two's - 2 missionaries, 3 in the First Presidency, 12 in the quorum of twelve apostles, marriage, etc. Yes, as RandFan has pointed out, even a group can be deceived together, so one must go somewhere where the people don't have the same possible defects - like this forum, for example.

 

[rcronk]

Elind - No, I teach my life experiences. I teach physical experiences like how I was mean to someone and what the effects of that was, or when I served someone and what effects that had. According to Mormon (and other) doctrine, we are here to learn what makes the most lasting happiness for the most people and what doesn't. In doing so, we make mistakes and the effects of those mistakes must be reversed in order to be happy and so that's where the atonement of Christ comes in - you can look up atonement at rcronk.wordpress.com to see more about that. That's where the gospel of Christ comes in and I have found that doctrine to work in my own life and so I share that too. I actually wish I could talk face to face with you and others - forum posts are so cumbersome and so many misconceptions abound (on both sides).

 

[RandFan]

RandFan and articulett - I'll give you both an example of what you're trying to tell me (that you don't think I get, but I do). Have you ever seen traffic lights flashing all red in both directions? What usually triggers that is a special secondary program in the traffic signal system. All it does is continuously check the lights to see if green or yellow appears in both directions at the same time - if it ever detects this condition, it takes control and disconnects the main traffic control system because the main system is obviously broken based on the fact that it let green or yellow come up in both directions at once. It is deemed broken and no longer can vote on whether or not it's broken. So there's a main system that controls the lights and a saftey system that is very simple and checks the output on the main system. They work together to detect errors. I do this also with my computer code at work - I write what are called unit tests that test the output of other parts of the system. Every time we make a change, we run the tests and they check to make sure the output of the system falls within allowable required ranges. If it does, we're good. If not, we stop and figure out the problem. In both examples, the main system, once found broken, is not allowed to continue because it cannot be trusted. I think this is like what you both are saying regarding deception detection and a deceived person not being able to detect their own deception. I get the principle. So, to detect error within myself, I have to have something outside of myself check me.

Very, very good. Then it breaks down.

This could be another person (if they're also not broken in the exact same way), the Holy Ghost, etc.. Everything done in the LDS church is done in at least two's - 2 missionaries, 3 in the First Presidency, 12 in the quorum of twelve apostles, marriage, etc. Yes, as RandFan has pointed out, even a group can be deceived together, so one must go somewhere where the people don't have the same possible defects - like this forum, for example.

"Holy Ghost"? The Holy Ghost is internal. You are saying a schizophrenic can rely on the voices in his head to know he's not delusional?

FWIW, I question everything, including people on this forum. Anything is possible. I'm not dogmatic about anything. I'm willing to consider gravity. I really am. You had better have good evidence though.

 

[rcronk]

BTW, the Holy Ghost was only one of many examples and I had a comment that said you wouldn't like that one, but I had to take that out because I hit the limit of my phone's ability to put lengthy posts in. In any case, hanging out here has been a good thing for me. I have always tried to hang out in different crowds so I can see my own holes better and I've found many and fixed them. The Bible even tells us to prove all things - I think some are too fearful or apathetic to do so. That's fine, everyone can make their own choices. I choose to seek truth and find holes. It's possible for any one of us to be deceived in any direction. I'm curious if you know of anything (besides religion) that is objectively unprovable but that is important?

 

[RandFan]

BTW, the Holy Ghost was only one of many examples and I had a comment that said you wouldn't like that one, but I had to take that out because I hit the limit of my phone's ability to put lengthy posts in. In any case, hanging out here has been a good thing for me. I have always tried to hang out in different crowds so I can see my own holes better and I've found many and fixed them. The Bible even tells us to prove all things - I think some are too fearful or apathetic to do so. That's fine, everyone can make their own choices. I choose to seek truth and find holes. It's possible for any one of us to be deceived in any direction. I'm curious if you know of anything (besides religion) that is objectively unprovable but that is important?

We'll, given that we can rely on our objective senses and I choose to think so if for no other reason than I don't have much of a choice. Note I didn't say no choice.

I've heard a number of argument for love and ethics. Sagan provides some good rhetoric in Contact for love.

Is this what you had in mind?

 

[rcronk]

Perhaps. I'm wondering if there's a way to bridge the gap here. Do you have links to ethics and love arguments? What do you think about them?

 

[RandFan]

Perhaps. I'm wondering if there's a way to bridge the gap here. Do you have links to ethics and love arguments?

More than I possibly care to quote.

I'll give you two to get you started.

Argument from love
Existence of God

What do you think about them?

They are not persuasive. Read the links.

 

[rcronk]

Thanks for the links, I'll at least check them out to see if I can see why you're not impressed. On another note, perhaps a method of self deception detection could deal with "fruits" or physical actions that one takes that end up benefiting the most people for the longest amount of time. I can detect through my own pysical actions how my motives and faith and "answers" or "inner knowingness" are motivating me to do selfless things that benefit the most people for the longest time. It's not fool proof or perfect, but it's a bridge between inner and outer reality that exists. After all, almost everything we do comes from thoughts or feelings or beliefs or faith or fear, etc. Just a thought.

 

[articulett]

rconk-- tons of humans agreed the earth was flat... it didn't make it so. If the people all believe the same truths, then they are using confirmation bias to reinforce each other in a completely circular fashion: "yep, the world sure is flat, because if not the oceans would spill"-- "damn right it is... otherwise you have to invent a spinning earth, and I think my motion sickness would kick in if the earth was spinning" "I'll say, plus god is omniscient so he would have mentioned it in the bible if it was round."

It's like when my cousin said, "the parting of the seas is enough for me" and my brother agreed. Suddenly that became two affirmations that everything Catholicism teaches is true based on a story the religion teaches with mutual masturbatory confirmation. You associate and read people who cherry pick and interpret doctrine as you do and then act like that makes it more true.... you believe that there is a god who speaks in the way you "hear" and then immerse yourself in the evidence that makes that belief seem true. But I can build a better case for a flat earth or a geocentric earth than all your feelings and quorums and inner knowingness-- and it still doesn't make it true. Believing you are making other peoples lives better or happier doesn't make it true. Believing god told you Joseph Smith was a prophet doesn't make god real or Joseph Smith a prophet. Don't you think the Muslims have even larger quorums and much more evidence for their beliefs-- and people willing to do anything to please Allah and get their happy eternity-- things that even you wouldn't do for your faith? It still doesn't make it true.

Your truth is indistinguishable from theirs... indistinguishable from a delusion... not more moral from any objective measurement-- it doesn't make people happier or better citizens or anything by any objective measurement-- the measurements are all part of the faith paradigm. You can feel like you are doing something really good by baptizing people by proxy after they're dead-- that doesn't mean you are actually doing anything. You can feel like you are doing great things by getting others to be Mormon-- that doesn't make Mormonism true nor does it mean it's good to manipulate others into believing it the way you've been manipulated into thinking it's "the truth". That certainly doesn't make faith a good way to know truth. Your "sources" for checking for error are not facts based on evidence that are the same for everyone-- they are the same sources and the same means people have been used to fool themselves and others for eons. And yet you imagine that you've magically escaped the propensity to be similarly fooled because you are "Special"? "Righteous"? "Sincere"?

Whether there is a god is a truth that is the same for everyone no matter what they believe-- as are all the things that you ascribe to this invisible immeasurable entity. If your god is like all other gods you don't believe in from Zeus to Bal-- then you are as guilty at spreading a delusion as others who proselytize are. Whether it's good or bad depends on whether there is any evidence in the world--objective evidence which makes your unbelievable story more likely to be objectively true than the eons of unbelievable similar themed storied involving invisible entities.

As for faith-- why would god need you to have that? Satan didn't need "faith" to know for certain god existed and defy him anyhow and become the guard keeper of god's torture chamber. And doubting Thomas got a visit from Jesus incarnate. None of your blather makes sense--and it just seems extra silly when you put a smiley face after it like that makes inanities acceptable.

And you must know this... you must know this because of the questions and statements like the above which you ignore while going on and on about how righteous you are and how you know that you have the really true woo. You must know, because why else would you aim to vilify the dissenter rather than examine whether your belief system has indoctrinated you with things that are not true. If your religion was not true-- how in the world would you come to know this? How could anyone similarly brainwashed? Why would you expect us to believe you over all the woos that come here or preach similar stories with equal confidence? What makes you think other religions DON'T have quorums and anecdote and people willing to die for faith and inner feelings of ecstatic knowingness?

I believe the bible tells you not to kill a person just because one person says they are an infidel or a witch-- but make sure and get confirmation from a second source. But all the sources in the world don't make this god true or anyone an actual "witch". Nor can your quorums and second parties and 3rd parties and infallible prophets or inner feelings from the invisible man in the sky.

 

[articulett]

Thanks for the links, I'll at least check them out to see if I can see why you're not impressed. On another note, perhaps a method of self deception detection could deal with "fruits" or physical actions that one takes that end up benefiting the most people for the longest amount of time. I can detect through my own pysical actions how my motives and faith and "answers" or "inner knowingness" are motivating me to do selfless things that benefit the most people for the longest time. It's not fool proof or perfect, but it's a bridge between inner and outer reality that exists. After all, almost everything we do comes from thoughts or feelings or beliefs or faith or fear, etc. Just a thought.

But to me it sounds imaginary. What are these fabulously selfless things you do? How are you making the world better? Aren't you making it better according to your inner paradigm which is what the hijackers were doing. Isn't your objective morality from god really the same as theirs-- you just have invisible entities and books that are telling you what is good and cherry picking different parts. Where is the evidence that any religion makes people treat others of a different belief better than those who don't believe... or those who believe other religions or even animals? My dog doesn't claim to get messages from god nor claim I called "women who raise children"-- brainless

My dog doesn't mix up faith and fact and proffer the former for the latter. My dog doesn't believe in blood atonement or religions or wars or proselytizing. I don't even think you have the ability to be a good listener nor do you have much of a sense of humor nor do you have any humility. My dog appears to have those traits. So what are all these selfless things your religion has done for you? Whose life is better and why do you deserve to rule your own planet and live happily ever after in the next life?

 

[articulett]

Thank you very much. Something new. I'm assuming you have seen Memento and/or 50 first dates?

I haven't, but I've heard the similarities. I have much more of a fascination with real life-- real medical stories-- real science (not sci-fi)-- true crime (not "thrillers") Clive Wearing fascinates me... he's in a perpetual twilight zone-- and it's really hard on his wife... and there's nothing anyone can do to fix it... ever.

I first saw a documentary on him over 20 years ago... and it's the think that made me wonder how there could be such thing as a soul if you can't even build a new memory without an essential part of the brain. But his wife actually has become more religious, and I would say that anything that makes it work for her is something I want her to have. Every moment he expects her to be excited for realizing that he finally awoke from his coma. After she leaves he calls her over and over to tell her he just woke up... he writes in his journal over and over "I'm now fully awake for the first time...." He cries because he missed seeing his children grow up--only he didn't really.

And his brain tells him this lie so his inability to make a new memory makes "sense". Ramachandran and others have similar stories about how the brain confabulates when presented with odd input and damage to vital connections.

The most recent documentary on Clive is The Man with the 7 Second Memory.

These are tragedies for the people involved-- but we can learn so much from them. And boy am I grateful for my ability to form new memories; it has become sooo valuable after seeing the man who cannot.