Ya Gotta Love John Dehlin'S Reasoning

[Hamilton Porter]

His response to this patheos article:

http://www.patheos.com/Mormon/Odd-Couple-Rosalynde-Welch-06-29-2012.html

For those of you who have found value in Mormon Stories....it would be awesome if you could let Rosalynde Welch hear about it. For the record -- she's the daughter-in-law of Jack Welch....founder of FARMS, and chief sponsor of the Daniel Peterson/Lou Midgley apologetic reign at the Maxwell Institute that just ended somewhat unceremoniously...so I can understand the family pain/angst in all this. Rosalynde is a sharp cookie. Great person. I just think she's blinded by family loyalties on this one. She doesn't even realize that in insulting Mormon Stories, she is indirectly insulting many of the people she admires (Richard and Claudia Bushman, Terryl Givens, Jana Riess, Joanna Brooks, Nate Oman, Daniel Peterson, etc.).

Insulting Mormon Stories = Insulting everyone who's ever been on that podcast?

John Dehlin is not a sharp cookie.

[Calm]

But conceding for the sake of argument that some kind of personal communication can spring directly from the soul, unmediated by environment or exigency, surely a vibrant social community is thelast place one would expect to find such authentic expression. A social community is nothing more than a source of mediating narratives, names, and norms that exist precisely to shape the substrate of basic human perception into meaningful experience. If "authentic" expression is language that arises directly from an unadulterated private conscience, then expression from within a community can only be seen as artificially mediated—it's simply the nature of the thing. This point was made directly by Laurel Thatcher Ulrich in her talk at the meeting of the Boston Mormon Stories community, though she was gracious enough not to draw out the obvious and dismaying implications for her audience.

Seems to me she is talking about the community that has sprung up surrounding the podcasts more than the podcasts themselves....which means there is little to no implication for those Mr. Dehlin has interviewed unless they have become part of the community. Edited July 2, 2012 by calmoriah

[wenglund]

I read Welch's well-written article, but I don't recall seeing any insults to Mormon Stories or Dehlin. I saw reasoned criticism, but not insults. Perhaps to the critics, criticism of them is an insult. I don't know. Over the several decades I have been doing apologetics, however, one thing has been made clear to me, and that is the critics dislike most that thing they do most--i.e. criticism.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Somebodyz]

His response to this patheos article:

http://www.patheos.c...06-29-2012.html

Insulting Mormon Stories = Insulting everyone who's ever been on that podcast?

John Dehlin is not a sharp cookie.

By that token, insulting the Church (its teachings)= insulting all its members.

Edited July 2, 2012 by Somebodyz

[Storm Rider]

This whole episode of John's reminds of the the guy who tries desparately to remove the foot from his mouth only to put both feet in, agian, and again. My counsel that will undboutedly go unheeded, but try, try again as they say. "John, shut up! Stop now, don't say anything more. Stop while you are ahead."

I just makes me shake my head in pity at how stupid each of us can be at different times in our life. This is one that Dehlin will look back on in shame.

[Hamilton Porter]

I read Welch's well-written article, but I don't recall seeing any insults to Mormon Stories or Dehlin. I saw reasoned criticism, but not insults. Perhaps to the critics, criticism of them is an insult. I don't know. Over the several decades I have been doing apologetics, however, one thing has been made clear to me, and that is the critics dislike most that thing they do most--i.e. criticism.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

There were plenty of insults, man.

1. "Fatal error or brilliant accident"

2. "In one sense, this was a bit silly."

3. "The institution has failed to fill any intellectual void."

4. "a lot like a high school gay-straight alliance and about as important."

[juliann]

That is an excellent example of his own use of ad hominem.....where did he publish it?

[Nevo]

Rosalynde Welch gets it exactly right. Thanks for the link.

[Calm]

That is an excellent example of his own use of ad hominem.....where did he publish it?

Yes, it is not coming up on a search.

[robuchan]

Both Dehlin and his critics are frequently imprecise when referring to Mormon Stories. Mormon Stories is:

1. Mormon Stories is a series of podcasts on apologetic issues and LDS fringe topics. The podcasts (some more than others) are relatively tame on the apostate scale, and have wide appeal to those interested in LDS apologetic issues ranging from very active and orthodox Mo's to exMo apostates.

2. A community, maybe even a movement, of fringe LDS'ers: those beginning to struggle with their testimony, progressive Mo's, NOMers, and those that have passed through it into ExMo's. Dehlin is their leader, and you can assume they have an agenda. For some it as pure as just wanting to publicize some issues to the church and generate some sympathy. For some it is to have the church change policy. For some it is quite sinister: to completely tear down the church and destroy it. I'm not sure completely how pure or sinister Dehlin is, and I'm not sure he knows himself.

So these discussions can quickly go off track because the critic or defender of Mormon Stories is being imprecise as to which part of Mormon Stories they're addressing.

Edited July 2, 2012 by robuchan

[wenglund]

There were plenty of insults, man.

1. "Fatal error or brilliant accident"

2. "In one sense, this was a bit silly."

3. "The institution has failed to fill any intellectual void."

4. "a lot like a high school gay-straight alliance and about as important."

I see negative/reasonable criticisms using effective analogies, not insults. But, I suppose insults are in the eye of the beholder. Some eyes seem far more sensitive than others.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Calm]

The critic was pretty precise in what she was critiquing, imo. She used "community" 21 times including in the title and along with the adjective "social" three times as well as defining what she was talking about: "Mormon Stories is an online community centered on a series of podcasts"

I really don't see how someone who is studying psychological/sociological topics missed the object of her commentary.

Edited July 2, 2012 by calmoriah

[wenglund]

So these discussions can quickly go off track because the critic or defender of Mormon Stories is being imprecise as to which part of Mormon Stories they're addressing.

Are you suggesting that defining Mormon Stories is like trying to nail Jello to the wall?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[robuchan]

Are you suggesting that defining Mormon Stories is like trying to nail Jello to the wall?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

wow, lol. OK. Last I checked, Mormon Stories doesn't have any truth claims as God's one true church and only path to salvation. But yeah, I guess.

[robuchan]

The critic was pretty precise in what she was critiquing, imo. She used "community" 21 times including in the title and along with the adjective "social" three times as well as defining what she was talking about: "Mormon Stories is an online community centered on a series of podcasts"

I really don't see how someone who is studying psychological/sociological topics missed the object of her commentary.

Yes, but also this part is focused specifically on definition #1.

By his own account, there were no interpretive resources available in 2001 to help him make sense of these issues, and Mormon Stories was born to fill that void: through a series of podcasts, Dehlin would develop a repository of unbiased historical information and interpretation to bring to light and make sense of the issues he encountered.

In one sense, this is a bit silly: in 2001, there were numerous Mormon journals—including BYU Studies, Dialogue, Sunstone, Irreantum, and others—that had been dealing with precisely these issues for decades, and by 2004, long before Mormon Stories got started, the Mormon blog-world was well launched on its treatment of the same. To my knowledge, Mormon Stories has not brought to light any new historical knowledge or even any novel historical interpretation; the organization does not fill any actual intellectual void.

It's unclear what Dehlin is referring to, but he could be accepting her criticism of the definition #2 but addressing the insulting of the definition #1 above.

[Storm Rider]

Boy, when Dehlin calls for the troops they march in lock-step to the call. To think that these people have a issues with the LDS Church? These are all cookie-cutter people and none of them have an original thought. Wow!

[robuchan]

Boy, when Dehlin calls for the troops they march in lock-step to the call. To think that these people have a issues with the LDS Church? These are all cookie-cutter people and none of them have an original thought. Wow!

I think this is a fair criticism of the ExMo community in general.

[morgan.deane]

His response to this patheos article:

http://www.patheos.c...06-29-2012.html

Insulting Mormon Stories = Insulting everyone who's ever been on that podcast?

John Dehlin is not a sharp cookie.

For somebody getting a PhD in his field and who reguarly throws bombs at the institutional church, he sure has thin skin. Was he expecting a career free of criticism with people falling over themselves to get his autograph? From his overblown reaction to the "hit piece" that he never read, to an ad hominem attack on his critic here, he seems very insecure when he is forced to defend his work and place in Mormon thought.

[robuchan]

Isn't Dehlin right?

When Welch states the following

To my knowledge, Mormon Stories has not brought to light any new historical knowledge or even any novel historical interpretation; the organization does not fill any actual intellectual void.

isn't she indirectly insulting Peterson, Bushman, Givens, and other respected LDS apologists, who combined account for at least a dozen hours of those podcasts?

[Calm]

wow, lol. OK. Last I checked, Mormon Stories doesn't have any truth claims as God's one true church and only path to salvation. But yeah, I guess.

John Larsen just called it a "pseudo-religion" in another thread though. Something to consider.

[Calm]

Isn't Dehlin right?

When Welch states the following

isn't she indirectly insulting Peterson, Bushman, Givens, and other respected LDS apologists, who combined account for at least a dozen hours of those podcasts?

No, since they are simply repeating on the podcasts what they have reported elsewhere if they deal with anything "intellectual", unless you have seen claims they have made that they consider the podcasts the equivalent of presenting papers at a conference or some such thing. They are not making any claims to breaking new intellectual ground in the interviews. Edited July 2, 2012 by calmoriah

[Calm]

but addressing the insulting of the definition #1 above.

Since she is calling him silly, I don't see how she is indirectly insulting anyone else unless perhaps they make the same claim.

I am not sure saying something does not fill an intellectual void is insulting. I don't think I am insulting the board to say I don't think this board fills an intellectual void in that while there is well worthwhile, fascinating discussion on the board, it is pretty much secondary in the sense of research or the reporting of what has happened elsewhere, not original thought even when it involves those who came up with those 'elsewhere' original thoughts. It fills an educational and social void in my opinion, but not an "intellectual void" as she defines it.

Edited July 2, 2012 by calmoriah

[Hamilton Porter]

That is an excellent example of his own use of ad hominem.....where did he publish it?

Yes, it is not coming up on a search.

FB status.

[robuchan]

Since she is calling him silly, I don't see how she is indirectly insulting anyone else unless perhaps they make the same claim.

I am not sure saying something does not fill an intellectual void is insulting. I don't think I am insulting the board to say I don't think this board fills an intellectual void in that while there is well worthwhile, fascinating discussion on the board, it is pretty much secondary in the sense of research or the reporting of what has happened elsewhere, not original thought even when it involves those who came up with those 'elsewhere' original thoughts. It fills an educational and social void in my opinion, but not an "intellectual void" as she defines it.

The phrase "intellectual void" comes as the conclusion of what she starts analyzing as " By his own account, there were no interpretive resources available in 2001 to help him make sense of these issues, and Mormon Stories was born to fill that void"

Since Dehlin's "void" is a reference to interpretation and making sense of issues, I doubt if she's using "intellectual void" the way you use it. It appears she's using the phrase "intellectual void" in a broader sense, which would be insulting.

[Calm]

The phrase "intellectual void" comes as the conclusion of what she starts analyzing as " By his own account, there were no interpretive resources available in 2001 to help him make sense of these issues, and Mormon Stories was born to fill that void"

Since Dehlin's "void" is a reference to interpretation and making sense of issues, I doubt if she's using "intellectual void" the way you use it. It appears she's using the phrase "intellectual void" in a broader sense, which would be insulting.

Possibly, but I still don't read it that way because she points to that type of resources as already existing and thus there would be no void to be filled. Edited July 2, 2012 by calmoriah