Apologists Turned Critics

[SlackTime]

...

Do you think the "average" LDS knows about Daniel Peterson?

...

I hadn't heard of him either until I got involved in apologetics. So no, I wouldn't expect a member who wasn't interested in apologetics and hadn't an interest in ancient studies to have heard of him.

A reader of Farms material would have though

And of course, the devil knows him as DCP is always foiling his work!

-SlackTime

[John Williams]

Knowing a bit about John W., who I consider an on-line friend, I do not believe that my observation describes his journey from apologist to critic, nor do I maintain that my observation, though valid for some, is true for all.

And I consider you a friend. I'm glad you're qualifying this as "some."

Nonetheless, in all honestly, my interactions with some former LDS apologists now turned critics has certified in my mind the legitimacy of the observation as a general description for what has actually taken place in some peopleâ??s lives.

I would like to turn this into a positive thread.

Given the validity of my claim, to what extent can we, as an online community of LDS believers, assist those whose need for public recognition makes them susceptible to becoming a critic of Daniel Peterson, FARMS, BYU, FAIR, the Book of Abraham, etc.?

Any thoughts?

I think you're talking about a personality type that crosses the spectrum of believer/unbeliever, critic/apologist. At times we all want attention, whether positive or negative. Heaven knows I have pulled some stupid stunts before.

So, if such a small subset of attention-seekers exists, then maybe we should try to give positive feedback and attention when it's merited, and not give people attention for negative behavior. That's kind of how I deal with my kids. Sometimes they act out because they feel that's the only way to get attention, and I have to check myself against giving that kind of attention and instead focus on reinforcing positive behavior.

Mind you, I don't think that criticism of the church is necessarily a negative behavior, nor is engaging in pro-LDS apologetics necessarily positive.

[Chaos]

Ahem....please, we can have fun but let's not have David's serious OP go totally off-topic or end up discussing personalities. Thanks.

[David Bokovoy]

Do you think the "average" LDS knows about Daniel Peterson?

I suspect that the average LDS has at least heard his name before. But sadly, the average LDS is not interested in scholarship. Why do you think the Work and the Glory sells more copies than anything FARMS has ever published?

I don't know of any books he has written that are carried by Deseret bookstores... and I'm not saying that Daniel doesn't perhaps write some good books.

Yes. Some of Danâ??s books are carried in Deseret Book stores. Personally, however, I would not consider Deseret Book publications an example of LDS scholarship.

I think a scholar is someone who reads a lot of books, and I like to read a lot of the best books... which I believe are written by our LDS General Authorities.

No doubt our General Authorities have written some of the best books, and some of those men over the years have even been scholars.

[Paul Ray]

I hadn't heard of him either until I got involved in apologetics. So no, I wouldn't expect a member who wasn't interested in apologetics and hadn't an interest in ancient studies to have heard of him.

FYI, I was interested in both apologetics and ancient studies before I found this website.

Hmm. Here's a thought.

Maybe I read some of his works without noticing his name before, and I only notice his name now because so many people refer to him and his name here on this website?

There was a time when I read books without reading the footnotes, and maybe some of those footnotes came from Daniel's ideas.

I'm just thinking out loud now.

A reader of Farms material would have though

I think I first discovered FARMS, and the articles written for FARMS, about the same time that I first discovered FAIR, which was about a year or two before I started writing on the FAIR board.

Ray, this post is pretty much totally off-topic. Please review the opening post (OP) and confine your comments to it. An off-topic comment here or there is OK, but you can see how one leads to another and pretty soon the thread is totally off-topic. Future off-topic posts may be deleted. Thanks.

[juliann]

So, if such a small subset of attention-seekers exists, then maybe we should try to give positive feedback and attention when it's merited, and not give people attention for negative behavior.

Such a subset inarguably exists and it is very, very small. That should go without saying.

Mind you, I don't think that criticism of the church is necessarily a negative behavior, nor is engaging in pro-LDS apologetics necessarily positive.

The criticizing from this small subset most certainly is a negative behavior. That is what defines this small subset.

I hope that this topic will not be derailed by the demand that if we talk about one small group of very hostile exmos we must include all exmos in that group. We are not and we will not so let's make that clear now and move on.

[John Williams]

Such a subset inarguably exists and it is very, very small. That should go without saying.

The criticizing from this small subset most certainly is a negative behavior. That is what defines this small subset.

I agree with you that such a subset exists across the belief spectrum. I would argue that the criticism and apologetics from people who are merely trying to get attention are negative behaviors.

I hope that this topic will not be derailed by the demand that if we talk about one small group of very hostile exmos we must include all exmos in that group. We are not and we will not so let's make that clear now and move on.

So far no one is demanding that.

[SlackTime]

FYI, I was interested in both apologetics and ancient studies before I found this website.

Hmm. Here's a thought.

Maybe I read some of his works without noticing his name before, and I only notice his name now because so many people refer to him and his name here on this website?

There was a time when I read books without reading the footnotes, and maybe some of those footnotes came from Daniel's ideas.

I'm just thinking out loud now.

I think I first discovered FARMS, and the articles written for FARMS, about the same time that I first discovered FAIR, which was about a year or two before I started writing on the FAIR board.

Perhaps by reviewing this Farms bio on him you'll recognize some of his work.

Daniel C. Peterson

-SlackTime

Please, please, this thread is NOT about DCP in particular. Please re-read the OP and confine comments to it. Thanks.

[gitxsanartist]

Has it ever occurred to anyone that apologetics eventually become critics because they eventually realize that they are not even convincing themselves with their own rhetoric? That is something to consider you know. Perhaps praise and money drive the most of us one direction or the other but I think some of us will make our decisions based solely on principle and ultimately on what we fill is the truth.

[SlackTime]

Has it ever occurred to anyone that apologetics eventually become critics because they eventually realize that they are not even convincing themselves with their own rhetoric? That is something to consider you know. Perhaps praise and money drive the most of us one direction or the other but I think some of us will make our decisions based solely on principle and ultimately on what we fill is the truth.

Perhaps your argument would have substance if you could demonstrate the high turnover rate of Mormon Apologist to Mormon Critic. By my count it seems awfully low.

-SlackTime

[Momus]

Go back to the original post and discuss that topic please.

[Doctor Steuss]

Has it ever occurred to anyone that apologetics eventually become critics because they eventually realize that they are not even convincing themselves with their own rhetoric? That is something to consider you know. Perhaps praise and money drive the most of us one direction or the other but I think some of us will make our decisions based solely on principle and ultimately on what we fill is the truth.

It's certainly a possibility. The converse is also quite possible (i.e. Critics becoming LDS apologists).

[John Williams]

Go back to the original post and discuss that topic please.

To summarize my position, it's don't feed the negative behavior. David asked what we could do to help, and that's pretty much all I have.

[juliann]

I agree with you that such a subset exists across the belief spectrum. I would argue that the criticism and apologetics from people who are merely trying to get attention are negative behaviors.

So far no one is demanding that.

It becomes a demand it when you attempt to make distinctions that are not being made. The subset doing the criticism are apologists. Are you saying that engaging in negative behavior is not negative? I don't understand...although this is how threads get derailed.

[Doctor Steuss]

Given the validity of my claim, to what extent can we, as an online community of LDS believers, assist those whose need for public recognition makes them susceptible to becoming a critic of Daniel Peterson, FARMS, BYU, FAIR, the Book of Abraham, etc.?

Any thoughts?

I guess that ultimately, the best thing we (as an online community) can do is express our appreciation for the work they do and offer our support (when possible).

[John Williams]

It becomes a demand it when you attempt to make distinctions that are not being made. The subset doing the criticism are apologists. Are you saying that engaging in negative behavior is not negative? I don't understand...although this is how threads get derailed.

I'm agreeing with you, actually.

I'm not making distinctions because bad behavior is bad behavior, and in answer to David's question, you just don't reward bad behavior.

[juliann]

Has it ever occurred to anyone that apologetics eventually become critics because they eventually realize that they are not even convincing themselves with their own rhetoric?

Perhaps you need to start a thread on your opinon because it is irrelevant to the topic of this thread.

[SlackTime]

To summarize my position, it's don't feed the negative behavior. David asked what we could do to help, and that's pretty much all I have.

The problem is, that while you are not "feeding" negative behavior, someone else often will. WIth kids, it is often their peer group, with apologists it is "the other side". I have seen cases where a well-meaning apologist, trying to build a bridge, tries to find common ground with the critic. To other apologists he seems to drift in his convictions until he almost appears critical. To the critics, he isn't believable until he "acknowledges" how wrong he was, but every time he compromises they seize on that as proof of his wrongness. In time, he loses the support of the LDS side and begins playing the tune of the critic because that is where he has made his support group.

-SlackTime

[John Williams]

The problem is, that while you are not "feeding" negative behavior, someone else often will. WIth kids, it is often their peer group, with apologists it is "the other side". I have seen cases where a well-meaning apologist, trying to build a bridge, tries to find common ground with the critic. To other apologists he seems to drift in his convictions until he almost appears critical. To the critics, he isn't believable until he "acknowledges" how wrong he was, but every time he compromises they seize on that as proof of his wrongness. In time, he loses the support of the LDS side and begins playing the tune of the critic because that is where he has made his support group.

-SlackTime

I can't control how other people respond to negative behavior, but I can control what I do. One does not have to "drift" to the other side to find common ground. For example, my "exit" came when I had been off the boards for several months. And I don't find myself drifting back toward the church now that I'm here.

[juliann]

Has it ever occurred to anyone that apologetics eventually become critics because they eventually realize that they are not even convincing themselves with their own rhetoric?

I should also say that this is accurate in the sense that they do not convince themselves. The group controls their narrative, regardless of which group they are in and this is particularly obvious when they incorporate hatespeech of their group since that is not generally supported by society. We saw that here when people that are usually congratulated as being reasonable began to adopt some of the group's shrill language from the other message board when they had never used it before.

[Momus]

I can't control how other people respond to negative behavior, but I can control what I do. One does not have to "drift" to the other side to find common ground. For example, my "exit" came when I had been off the boards for several months. And I don't find myself drifting back toward the church now that I'm here.

Ok lets not make this a personal thread folks. We understand we have posters here that have experienced this type of crossover but lets try to separate that here.

Momus

[John Williams]

Ok lets not make this a personal thread folks. We understand we have posters here that have experienced this type of crossover but lets try to separate that here.

Momus

Sorry. I retract that statement. I just find it interesting that people believe that you "drift" if you try to understand the folks on the other side. It doesn't have to be that way.

[Paul Ray]

Ray, this post is pretty much totally off-topic. Please review the opening post (OP) and confine your comments to it. An off-topic comment here or there is OK, but you can see how one leads to another and pretty soon the thread is totally off-topic. Future off-topic posts may be deleted. Thanks.

Understood. MY intent was not to go off topic, though. I was simply using Daniel as an example.

And to now get more on the topic ...

Personally, I'm not interested in public recognition so I can't see why people would change sides to get it, but since it seems to make a difference for some people I'm willing to give them a pat on the back if and when I see they, individually, are simply trying to be of service.

... which seems like a good thing to do because it's then not about me or what I get but about what others are trying to offer and my recognition of their offer to help me.

... and that certainly wouldn't hurt, would it?

It's kinda like accepting help from someone who is offering to help me when I can take care of the situation myself, which gives them an opportunity to help me and in doing so be of service while giving me the opportunity to get to know them... when otherwise we would have gone separate ways.

Do you now know what I mean?

Have you ever accepted something from a child just because he/she was trying to do something they thought would help you... like giving you a piece of trash he/she picked up off the ground... and then saying "Thank you" with a little smile on your face before getting back to your own business?

It's like that, I think, sometimes, and if it doesn't help us, at least it keeps them out of trouble.

[John Williams]

I should also say that this is accurate in the sense that they do not convince themselves. The group controls their narrative, regardless of which group they are in and this is particularly obvious when they incorporate hatespeech of their group since that is not generally supported by society. We saw that here when people that are usually congratulated as being reasonable began to adopt some of the group's shrill language from the other message board when they had never used it before.

That's pretty standard behavior for humans to adapt to the expectations of the group they are with. When my wife gets a call from her family in Idaho, she immediately regains her rural Idaho accent, and when she's at the store or at church here, she sounds like a Texan and uses Texas vocabulary.

It's kind of like the way church members have their own vocabulary and speech patterns. It's not that the group so much controls the narrative as perhaps the group setting controls the way the narrative is delivered.

[edited out personal thread-related stuff]

[Momus]

Anymore off topic posts will be removed.

-The Julianns