Mcconkie On Intelligences

[katherine the great]

The topic of intelligence is indeed very interesting. The point was simply that at one point in my life the statements McConkie makes about intelligence seemed deep and full of meaning. So while the topic of intelligence is interesting, I simply claim that upon close inspection McConkie's statements don't really say much or explain anything after all.

But, there remains the real possibility that I can be convinced otherwise. Can you perhaps sell me on the explanatory power (or even the conceptual coherence of) this kind of talk?

Probably not. It was my (petulant) way of telling you that your post came across as somewhat rude and condescending.

[dougtheavenger]

Since official doctrine has not clarified this yet, it remains speculation. Here is what I think. We have always existed as individual spirits. Our first spiritual birth gave us some new knowledge which changed us and enlightened us and made us sons and daughters of our Heavenly Father and Mother. In our premortal existence we have a spiritual form that is male or female. Our spiritual form is not a body in the sense of being a plurality. In other words, it is indivisible.

[Nofear]

I think the Encyclopedia of Mormonism has a very reasonable and balanced statement on the intelligence:

Concerning man's premortal existence, the Lord revealed to Joseph Smith, "Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be" (D&C 93:29). "Intelligence," as used here, is singular, and it is not clear from this passage if it refers to individual, conscious identity. As noted, Abraham referred to the spirit offspring of God as organized intelligences, apparently using the word "intelligences" to mean "spirits." Church authorities have indicated that spirit birth was not the beginning. Spencer W. Kimball, then a member of the Quorum of the Twelve, wrote, "Our spirit matter was eternal and co-existent with God, but it was organized into spirit bodies by our Heavenly Father" (The Miracle of Forgiveness, p. 5, Salt Lake City, 1969). Marion G. Romney, of the First Presidency, speaking of people's divine origin as children of God, stated, "Through that birth process, self-existing intelligence was organized into individual spirit beings" (Ensign 8 [Nov. 1978]:14). Bruce R. McConkie, an apostle, wrote: Abraham used the name intelligences to apply to the spirit children of the Eternal Father. The intelligence or spirit element became intelligences after the spirits were born as individual entities (Abr. 3:22-24). Use of this name designates both the primal element from which the spirit offspring were created and also their inherited capacity to grow in grace, knowledge, power, and intelligence itself, until such intelligences, gaining the fulness of all things, become like their Father, the Supreme Intelligence [MD, p. 387].

While the revelations leave no doubt as to the existence of intelligent matter prior to its being organized as spirits, speculation sometimes arises regarding the nature of premortal existence and whether there was individual identity and consciousness prior to birth as a spirit. Some hold that the terms "intelligence" and "intelligences" have reference to a form of prespirit conscious self-existence, which included individual identity, variety, and agency (so reasoned B. H. Roberts, pp. 401-423). Others maintain that while these characteristics, attributes, and conditions are eternal, they essentially came together for each individual at the spirit birth. The question of whether prespirit intelligence had individual identity and consciousness remains unanswered. Elder Joseph Fielding Smith gave this caution in 1936: Some of our writers have endeavored to explain what an intelligence is, but to do so is futile, for we have never been given any insight into this matter beyond what the Lord has fragmentarily revealed. We know, however, that there is something called intelligence which always existed. It is the real eternal part of man, which was not created or made. This intelligence combined with the spirit constitutes a spiritual identity or individual [p. 10].

Partly why I think it is fair is that it leaves statements such as

If we were "organized" as individuals at a point in time, then we are not "eternal" are we? If there is a before and after then we are already in a time reference- so it can't be true, IF we are eternal, that we were not "we" "before" we were spirit children.

as an open question. I, for example, strongly come down on the side that individual identity does not predate the formation of our spirit body and assert that a core component upon which my identity is fully contigent nonetheless has alwas existed (and will always exist) and predates the formation of my spirit body. This "core component" I call intelligent matter.

Still, I can in some abstract way conceptualize that others hold a different opinion about identity (don't think I'll ever "understand" it ).

[mfbukowski]

I think the Encyclopedia of Mormonism has a very reasonable and balanced statement on the intelligence:

Partly why I think it is fair is that it leaves statements such as

as an open question. I, for example, strongly come down on the side that individual identity does not predate the formation of our spirit body and assert that a core component upon which my identity is fully contigent nonetheless has alwas existed (and will always exist) and predates the formation of my spirit body. This "core component" I call intelligent matter.

Still, I can in some abstract way conceptualize that others hold a different opinion about identity (don't think I'll ever "understand" it ).

Well I am still thinking about this one, but I see it maybe a little differently than most, but I think I fit in all the salient facts.

Being a social constructivist, I think about weird things like if undiscovered species "exist" in the sense of fitting into our system of taxonomy etc.

I see undiscovered species as not "existing" to us, certainly not as a genus and species etc- because they have not yet been classified. I find it fascinating that many many species of fish are "discovered" in fish markets in third world countries. People have been eating them for hundreds of years, know where to find them, how to cook them and what is the best part to eat, but for western science they don't "exist". It's kind of like the question of if we were "mistaken" all these years about Pluto being a planet because we changed its classification.

The organization of data in many senses really "creates" it because it puts it in a context. And I see that is at least partially what is meant by God "organizing matter unorganized".

It really becomes a matter of definitions. I can't tell you anything about a species which has not yet been discovered- I don't know if it is a bird or a whale, or maybe a flying bird-whale thingy. But of course there is some sense in which we say it "exists" but it hasn't yet been integrated into the fold of science. It is out there somewhere unorganized in the wild waiting to be organized.

So maybe it is like that when an intelligence becomes a spirit child of God. Maybe it is almost like a ceremony or ordinance in which the wild intelligence out there finally becomes "tame" and is willing to be classified and come into the fold, overcome his "natural intelligence" and submit to law and become a child of God.

I short, it is exactly like being baptized and coming into the church- the wild intelligence is re-born as a spirit child of God.

So she has always existed but has also in a sense had an identity, but in a sense has not yet been "organized" into the Culture of Eloheim, as it were. She has not be "civilized" into possible godness. She has not been able to "fill the measure of her creation" because she has been wild and uncontrolled, but by accepting the plan of salvation- even as an intelligence- she has been given the opportunity to grow as a spirit child, and eventually be born into a body and proceed along the rest of the Plan to eventual possible godhood, to be like her Heavenly Father.

I have no idea if that is right, but I kind of like thinking of it that way.

Edit: I just made that up on the spot so don't expect it to be consistent with my previous positions!

Edited January 8, 2012 by mfbukowski

[dtorge26]

Since official doctrine has not clarified this yet, it remains speculation. Here is what I think. We have always existed as individual spirits. Our first spiritual birth gave us some new knowledge which changed us and enlightened us and made us sons and daughters of our Heavenly Father and Mother. In our premortal existence we have a spiritual form that is male or female. Our spiritual form is not a body in the sense of being a plurality. In other words, it is indivisible.

Interesting. Regarding the first spiritual birth, who or what designed that process? If it was HF and HM, then how were they first spiritually born?

[inquiringmind]

I found this quote from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism interesting.

Concerning man's premortal existence, the Lord revealed to Joseph Smith, "Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be" (D&C 93:29). "Intelligence," as used here, is singular, and it is not clear from this passage if it refers to individual, conscious identity. As noted, Abraham referred to the spirit offspring of God as organized intelligences, apparently using the word "intelligences" to mean "spirits." ...Marion G. Romney, of the First Presidency, speaking of people's divine origin as children of God, stated, "Through that birth process, self-existing intelligence was organized into individual spirit beings" (Ensign 8 [Nov. 1978]:14).

As was this.

as an open question. I, for example, strongly come down on the side that individual identity does not predate the formation of our spirit body and assert that a core component upon which my identity is fully contingent nonetheless has always existed (and will always exist) and predates the formation of my spirit body. This "core component" I call intelligent matter.

Thank you.

Edited January 8, 2012 by inquiringmind

[dtorge26]

Let's put a bit of a cosmological spin on this idea of the eternal nature of our spirits.

The big bang theory essentially supports the notion that time (and space) had a 'beginning' (at the moment of the big bang). So, theoretically of course, anything that existed external to our big bang should be viewed as not having a beginning, right? If it pre-dates time itself, it would be eternal, at least looking backwards through time. This could be our universe, or universe B.

Now, if universe B had been preceeded by universe A, then the situation gets stickier. Any item created in universe A would have had a definite beginning from the perspective of universe A. However, it would be eternal, or at least not have a beginning, from the perspective of universe B.

So, this could really all just be a matter of perspective, from a complex reality that gives rise to multiple generations of time.

[Acris Venator]

If the body is a temple, and the temple is a microcosm of the cosmos, then the body is an instrument of order. Because the word "cosmos" means order.

Hence, birth from the womb of HM is likely the way spirit children are "organized".

[mfbukowski]

Let's put a bit of a cosmological spin on this idea of the eternal nature of our spirits.

The big bang theory essentially supports the notion that time (and space) had a 'beginning' (at the moment of the big bang). So, theoretically of course, anything that existed external to our big bang should be viewed as not having a beginning, right? If it pre-dates time itself, it would be eternal, at least looking backwards through time. This could be our universe, or universe B.

Now, if universe B had been preceeded by universe A, then the situation gets stickier. Any item created in universe A would have had a definite beginning from the perspective of universe A. However, it would be eternal, or at least not have a beginning, from the perspective of universe B.

So, this could really all just be a matter of perspective, from a complex reality that gives rise to multiple generations of time.

That is a way of looking at it.

There is also the possibility of what are now called "multiverses" in some sense co-existing at the same "time" or in other dimensions.

The problem is we don't really have the language to deal with these seemingly contradictory notions, except perhaps in mathematics. We are stuck thinking as we did thousands of years ago because if you can't say it, you can't think it.

[Storm Rider]

I'll throw this out because it responds to various elements of various posts, and I'm trying to tie it back to the OP:

Three considerations that help me in thinking about organizing intelligence, intelligences and spirits are: 1) that they are organized collectively as well as individually; 2) since in their final, perfect state they exist as “One,” they must have been a collective of sorts before their individualization that necessitated the Atonement; 3) since collective organization precedes the individualization that requires the next collective organization, Atonement is necessary for each advancing step.

Perhaps Abraham 3:22 refers to a collective as well as an individual organization of intelligence and the following verses reflect eternal principles of collective organization that were practiced in prior estates and applications: D&C 51:2, 15; 78:11; 88:119.

As a collective, the three terms (intelligence, intelligences and spirits) may refer to the same thing in different estates. Perhaps uncreated intelligences begin to be called spirits once they are organized into a dispensational unit of pre-mortal readiness to receive a body (man is spirit D&C 93). Perhaps the terms are relative and the spirit of mortal man looks upon the pre-mortal spirit as an intelligence or as a collective of intelligences, and the spirits of resurrected immortal persons look upon mortality as an exercise of intelligence (individual and collective), not spirit. So we advance from being organized as one with God as intelligences to one with God as spirits to one with God as resurrected beings. The more we look back, the more we realize we were all in the same boat after all, just as we will be when we become One with God. The correct use of agency determines how far we can see back and ahead (D&C 93:24).

The individual is created when he recognizes himself as a distinct part of a collective of other individuals, which can only occur when such a unit is organized. The co-eternal aspect of this is that neither the individual nor the collective can exist without each other. The verses I mentioned above and the Pearl of Great Price creation accounts indicate that sometimes God brings about this organization through graceful interference, and sometimes He oversees intelligences to organize along the principle they have learned from Him.

Materially, individuals and collectives never run out because “all there is that has agency” is different forms of the same eternal thing with the attendant attributes of never ending and never beginning.

There appears to be more a struggle with terms than a problem with concept. I agree with the description above and it agrees with the words of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, JFS, SK, and all other prophets. The attempt to differentiate between the doctrine present at the restoration of the Church and the doctrine of the present day church is to develop an agenda first and then seek to find evidence while closing eyes to all continuity. It is not the work of a historian or theologian, but that of a polemic. I reject in total research by agenda because it leads to a self-imposed state of ignorance and confusion. To propagate such forms of thought is apostacy. It is also just a very poor form of scholarship and way of thinking...in fact, it is not thinking at all.

Edited January 8, 2012 by Storm Rider

[Nofear]

Let's put a bit of a cosmological spin on this idea of the eternal nature of our spirits.

The big bang theory essentially supports the notion that time (and space) had a 'beginning' (at the moment of the big bang). So, theoretically of course, anything that existed external to our big bang should be viewed as not having a beginning, right?

I know some are fans of multiverse theories. I'm not one of them and so I'll point out that technically the big bang theory does not require that we extrapolate back to "t=0". The observational evidence is consistent with the universe being very, very, very hot and very, very, very dense at a finite time in the past (~13.7 billion years). It is theoretically and conceptually very easy to continue the "story" to t=0 and that is what most cosmologists are wont to do. But, it is not necessary.

[Cold Steel]

We know that intelligences differ from one another and that Jesus stood in the midst of those of us who were spirits and was acknowledged as the most intelligent of them all. Likewise, we know that the two aspects of our universe are made up of 1) that which acts, and 2) that which is acted upon. The first is intelligence and the latter is ingredients, or matter. Intelligence is the active part of the universe that gives God His power. It also comes in varying degrees, which is why intelligence can be manifest as a man, beast, insect, plant, etc., when the creative process is brought into being. Thus, as one being differs from another in intelligence, so Christ reigns Supreme among the Intelligences.

The early brethren taught that Sons of Perdition, Satan and all those that followed him would eventually work their way backward through the creative process until they ended up as they began...native Intelligence without any sense of cohesiveness. Part of the Intelligence that made up Satan and his master, Cain, may rise up again one day, but never as the beings they were.

At least that's how I view it.

[AngelPalmoni]

Organized intelligence = Spirit Bodies with heavenly parents

Unorganized intelligence = Eternal intelligences, pre pre pre pre pre pre pre infinite earth lives...

[asbestosman]

I have another, seemingly unrelated, question for you. Suppose that I tell you I had a boring book that I placed on top of a very interesting book. Suppose further that I claim that some interest leaked from one to the other and that the first book was now a little bit interesting.

I could see it working as a metaphor. Reading an interesting book might make a boring book a bit more interesting by providing a better background for it. That is also part of the reason it is nonsense when taken literally. Interesting is a rather subjective term which depends on the environment one uses to make the judgment--including other books or experiences.

Something that makes more sense than transmission of intelligence is that of information. I believe the two are related at some level. In fact, information is also related to your book example. Information is not transferred from book to book in the manner you described, but if those books were files on my computer, a person or a program could transfer information from one to the other. I think intelligence in some ways could be transferred as well, perhaps even through books. I know for the most part people think of intelligence as being somewhat analogous to the speed of a CPU on your computer, but there's much more. I don't think I'm particularly fast at puzzles. However, I can often come up with creative solutions a while after others have given up (perhaps out of boredom). The more knowledge and experience I have, the more capable I become at solving puzzles. But there are more components to it as well. I think it's more than just how much you've memorized. It seems to be how well you're able to sort through knowledge for relevance and then adjust it to the situation at hand. Perhaps in some sense IBM's Watson is intelligent. However, I don't think it's conscious or sentient or has any sense of self.

Intuitively, the notion of spirit explains an individual's identity. For quite some time, I assumed this must refer to consciousness, talents, personality, mental sharpness, and disposition. The problem, however, is that these things are very dependent on things such as chemicals and brain health. In some sense, I think the notion of intelligences is supposed to explain why people choose differently. Why does one person choose exaltation while another choses outer darkness? It's almost like the initial conditions of a function or a program.

So perhaps intelligence could be useful to explain our sense of identities--both our own and the sense of identity we have of others. However, it suffers from having to still explain physiological influences on our identities. Furthermore, even if those are explained, we can still ask what the ultimate cause is of one identity's personality being different from another. I'm not sure that in principle that could ever overcome turtles all the way down for explanatory power. However, I don't see in principle why there couldn't be some spiritual physical thing--perhaps somewhat like hormones or drugs but different--which have a strong influence on our personalities, identities, etc. Sure, maybe you see it as superfluous by parsimony. However, if there is an afterlife with consciousness, personality, etc., then the idea of spirits makes a bit more sense.

[Nofear]

The early brethren taught that Sons of Perdition, Satan and all those that followed him would eventually work their way backward through the creative process until they ended up as they began...native Intelligence without any sense of cohesiveness. Part of the Intelligence that made up Satan and his master, Cain, may rise up again one day, but never as the beings they were.

I would like to see some examples of early brethren teachings to exemplify this.

[Tarski]

I know some are fans of multiverse theories. I'm not one of them and so I'll point out that technically the big bang theory does not require that we extrapolate back to "t=0". The observational evidence is consistent with the universe being very, very, very hot and very, very, very dense at a finite time in the past (~13.7 billion years). It is theoretically and conceptually very easy to continue the "story" to t=0 and that is what most cosmologists are wont to do. But, it is not necessary.

How do you get past the Penrose-Hawking singularity theorems? In other words, there is more than the observational data that needs to be contended with. There are also theoretical demands. After all, we need a solution the Einstein's equations.

[Tarski]

Organized intelligence = Spirit Bodies with heavenly parents

Unorganized intelligence = Eternal intelligences, pre pre pre pre pre pre pre infinite earth lives...

This is conceptually incomprehensible to me given that intelligence just is a species of organization. Completely unorganized intelligence sounds like an oxymoron.

Edited January 12, 2012 by Tarski

[thesometimesaint]

Tarski:

JS saith that the intelligences are light and truth. Unfortunately we have no further definition of what those are.

[Tarski]

Isn't it clear that the majority of people talking about this here conceive of intelligence as some kind of stuff or material? I know of not one cognitive scientist, or one modern academic philosopher that would conceptualize intelligence in this way. The "intelligence as material" notion just doesn't lead anywhere. It just sits there inertly giving a twinkly feeling like a shinny object attracting the gaze of a fish.

If one scrambles up a brain, then intelligence is lost but it is not because some stuff has escaped. It is because intelligence is realized by the active organization of the embodied brain or conceivable some other complex material system. How could this much not be obvious at this point in history?

Edited January 12, 2012 by Tarski

[Tarski]

dup

Edited January 12, 2012 by Tarski

[Tarski]

I could see it working as a metaphor. Reading an interesting book might make a boring book a bit more interesting by providing a better background for it. That is also part of the reason it is nonsense when taken literally. Interesting is a rather subjective term which depends on the environment one uses to make the judgment--including other books or experiences.

Something that makes more sense than transmission of intelligence is that of information. I believe the two are related at some level. In fact, information is also related to your book example. Information is not transferred from book to book in the manner you described, but if those books were files on my computer, a person or a program could transfer information from one to the other. I think intelligence in some ways could be transferred as well, perhaps even through books.

Information is an abstraction as you know. It has in every instance to be instantiated by a physical system does it not.

Intuitively, the notion of spirit explains an individual's identity. For quite some time, I assumed this must refer to consciousness, talents, personality, mental sharpness, and disposition. The problem, however, is that these things are very dependent on things such as chemicals and brain health. In some sense, I think the notion of intelligences is supposed to explain why people choose differently. Why does one person choose exaltation while another choses outer darkness? It's almost like the initial conditions of a function or a program.

So perhaps intelligence could be useful to explain our sense of identities--both our own and the sense of identity we have of others. However, it suffers from having to still explain physiological influences on our identities. Furthermore, even if those are explained, we can still ask what the ultimate cause is of one identity's personality being different from another. I'm not sure that in principle that could ever overcome turtles all the way down for explanatory power. However, I don't see in principle why there couldn't be some spiritual physical thing--perhaps somewhat like hormones or drugs but different--which have a strong influence on our personalities, identities, etc. Sure, maybe you see it as superfluous by parsimony. However, if there is an afterlife with consciousness, personality, etc., then the idea of spirits makes a bit more sense.

[Nofear]

How do you get past the Penrose-Hawking singularity theorems? In other words, there is more than the observational data that needs to be contended with. There are also theoretical demands. After all, we need a solution the Einstein's equations.

I (and the theory technically) neither require that matter is compressed to a point or that curvature is infinite. That occurs and t=0 and as I suggested, we don't have to go that far.

That said, the New Scientist has an interesting article up Why Physicists Can't Avoid a Creation Event (free with free registration). Basically the article argues that persuasive arguments have been put forth that deny any non ex-nihilo cosmology. For me personally, all of the proposed models addressed (like chaotic inflation, etc.) weren't really ones that I found palpable to Mormon cosmology anyway.

[Nofear]

Isn't it clear that the majority of people talking about this here conceive of intelligence as some kind of stuff or material? I know of not one cognitive scientist, or one modern academic philosopher that would conceptualize intelligence in this way. The "intelligence as material" notion just doesn't lead anywhere. It just sits there inertly giving a twinkly feeling like a shinny object attracting the gaze of a fish.

If one scrambles up a brain, then intelligence is lost but it is not because some stuff has escaped. It is because intelligence is realized by the active organization of the embodied brain or conceivable some other complex material system. How could this much not be obvious at this point in history?

The Mormon concept of intelligence should not be confused with our typical use of the word intelligence (e.g. coherent mental activity). Others have differing opinions, but I argue that an intelligence must have a body and brain organized for it before it can act "intelligently".

[asbestosman]

Information is an abstraction as you know. It has in every instance to be instantiated by a physical system does it not.

Yes. Is that not also true of intelligence (used in the usual sense)?I don't think I bothered to be clear about when I was using the word intelligence to refer to the complex phenomena as people usually understand it and when it is used in the scriptures to refer to spiritual matter or spirits (which are physical things according to LDS scriptures). In the part you initially quoted, I'm speaking of intelligence in the more usual sense. In the latter part, I am talking about intelligence from the more uniquely Mormon point of view albeit from an intuitive angle, not necessarily a doctrinal one. Edited January 12, 2012 by asbestosman

[dtorge26]

Tarski:

JS saith that the intelligences are light and truth. Unfortunately we have no further definition of what those are.

If the "stuff" of intelligence is light and truth, then, to me, it seems we are really not talking about anything material at all. (Grant me that "light" is not really referencing our common usage of 'light' as electromagnetic waves or photons). We seem to be in the realm of the metaphysical, which includes ideas, forms, or even laws.

My best take on an interpretation of intelligence, or light and truth, as used in D&C, is that it describes 'a correct understanding of principles as they really are'. So, we acquire light and truth as our understanding improves. And our understanding is not possible without intelligence.

The analogy which helps me visualize this is that of the coming artificial intelligence. For the scientist to pull this off, he/she will first need to understand perfectly the principles which enable a sentient creature to think, feel, remember, etc. At that point, there is nothing from stopping him/her from creating that creature, which (following the analogy), would be the equivalent of creating a 'spirit'. Thus, spirits are created from intelligence.

I agree that the book of Abraham seriously confuses this topic by the interchangeable use of the terms 'intelligences' and 'spirits'. I think the term 'spirit' would have been are more accurate term to use.