73 replies to this topic

[calmoriah]

robuchan, on 02 July 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

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 by calmoriah, 02 July 2012 - 09:37 AM.

[calmoriah]

robuchan, on 02 July 2012 - 09:15 AM, said:

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 by calmoriah, 02 July 2012 - 09:43 AM.

[Hamilton Porter]

juliann, on 02 July 2012 - 08:27 AM, said:

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

calmoriah, on 02 July 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

Yes, it is not coming up on a search.

FB status.

[robuchan]

calmoriah, on 02 July 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

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.

[calmoriah]

robuchan, on 02 July 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:

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 by calmoriah, 02 July 2012 - 10:04 AM.

[Hamilton Porter]

robuchan, on 02 July 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

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?

¿En serio?  What part of Givens´s podcast did you not yet know from reading his books? She does acknowledge that you can hear scholars in podcast format, which is original. I would also add that you can hear interesting biographical information on the likes of Givens, Quinn, Bushman, that are pretty cool. That's it.

[wenglund]

robuchan, on 02 July 2012 - 09:09 AM, said:

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.

They don't have Apostles or General Authorities, or a Church office building, or scriptures, or a myriad of other irrelevancies that you could have mentioned. They do have shared views ("truth" claims) that define them as a community.

Quote

But yeah, I guess.

I am glad you see the point.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[robuchan]

Hamilton Porter, on 02 July 2012 - 10:08 AM, said:

¿En serio?  What part of Givens´s podcast did you not yet know from reading his books? She does acknowledge that you can hear scholars in podcast format, which is original. I would also add that you can hear interesting biographical information on the likes of Givens, Quinn, Bushman, that are pretty cool. That's it.

You're straining at gnats.  She insulted the podcasts, which feature prominent LDS apologists.  Dehlin is simply responding to that.

[Hamilton Porter]

AND...John Dehlin takes down the link from his Facebook. Too many Welch supporters commented.

[calmoriah]

robuchan, on 02 July 2012 - 10:17 AM, said:

You're straining at gnats.  She insulted the podcasts, which feature prominent LDS apologists.  Dehlin is simply responding to that.

I really don't see that.  I think she insulted his expectations of what the podcasts would be...that he inflated their value, but not the podcasts themselves.

That he might see that as insulting because he sees them as something they are not is certainly possible.

Edited by calmoriah, 02 July 2012 - 10:30 AM.

[wenglund]

robuchan, on 02 July 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

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. However, this is where I may disagree somewhat and to a very minor extent with Welch. I think that in a way Dehlin may indirectly fill the intellectual void merely by expanding the audience of those, such as Peterson et. al., who directly fill the intellectual void.

But, let's not nit-pick (ironically strain at gnats) to the point of missing the gist of what Welch astutely said.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited by wenglund, 02 July 2012 - 10:36 AM.

[calmoriah]

Dehlin positions himself better if he can claim he is defending the honour of those he interviewed rather than being offended because she thought his claim about the lack of resources was silly or that he inflated the academic/intellectual value of the podcasts.

i would agree with Wade that the podcasts have communicative/educational value in that they help to fill a void that exists for those that don't like to read for information or like a more visual approach.  But I think one should be clear about the difference between educational value---sharing information/knowledge in a new way---and intellectual value---sharing new knowledge/information.  The podcasts do the first, not the second.

Edited by calmoriah, 02 July 2012 - 10:45 AM.

[Jaybear]

I can see why many of you like the article.  Is she always this deliciously snarky?

I find it especially interesting that she would use this throw away quip: "a lot like a high school gay-straight alliance and about as important."
That she would choose to belittle sincere efforts to ease the difficulties gay teens face in our society,  tells me quite a bit about her, and her target audience.

[Libs]

Storm Rider, on 02 July 2012 - 09:15 AM, said:

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 don't see that, at all.  There is actually quite a bit of disagreement within the Facebook community, of which I am a part.  I didn't agree with John's choice to stifle the MI article about him, and there were a lot of people who didn't agree with that move.  He does not (at all) always get "lock step" agreement, in that community.  And, he is generally open to being given advice...even asks for it, on occasion.

[Libs]

Jaybear, on 02 July 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

I can see why many of you like the article.  Is she always this deliciously snarky?

I find it especially interesting that she would use this throw away quip: "a lot like a high school gay-straight alliance and about as important."
That she would choose to belittle sincere efforts to ease the difficulties gay teens face in our society,  tells me quite a bit about her, and her target audience.

Yeah, that remark really bothered me, as well.  Very condescending.

[wenglund]

Jaybear, on 02 July 2012 - 11:46 AM, said:

I can see why many of you like the article.  Is she always this deliciously snarky?

I find it especially interesting that she would use this throw away quip: "a lot like a high school gay-straight alliance and about as important." That she would choose to belittle sincere efforts to ease the difficulties gay teens face in our society,  tells me quite a bit about her, and her target audience.

It tells me that she doesn't irrationally over-inflate the meaningfulness and importance high-school clubs. It tells me that she is able to keep things in proper perspective.

Your sour snarky retort tells me just the opposite.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[cinepro]

That is a really well-written article.  One of the best I've read in a long time.  My only criticism would be that the analogy to gay high school clubs seemed a little forced.

But other than that, really good!

[Jaybear]

wenglund, on 02 July 2012 - 12:16 PM, said:

It tells me that she doesn't irrationally over-inflate the meaningfulness and importance high-school clubs. It tells me that she is able to keep things in proper perspective.

Your sour snarky retort tells me just the opposite.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It am not surprised that you see it that way.  Clearly, she know her audience.
Like I said,  I can see why many here like the article.

[calmoriah]

She should have left it at high school clubs in general...at least it would have been spot on for my high school.  Maybe a few kids in the political/support a cause clubs were committed and focused enough I could see them carrying on after high school, but the stuff most of them did was very shallow and had little impact beside decorating the school with posters on occasion.

[cinepro]

calmoriah, on 02 July 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

She should have left it at high school clubs in general...at least it would have been spot on for my high school.  Maybe a few kids in the political/support a cause clubs were committed and focused enough I could see them carrying on after high school, but the stuff most of them did was very shallow and had little impact beside decorating the school with posters on occasion.

More importantly, they also serve to decorate college applications.