Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Uvu Conference On Internet And Mormons

LifeOnaPlate

By LifeOnaPlate
in General Discussions

Recommended Posts

LifeOnaPlate Community Regular

LifeOnaPlate

Posted
Posted

Live feed is available here:

http://www.uvu.edu/uvutv/

Thursday, March 29th in Library Auditorium

8:30-8:45 a.m. ~ Welcome

8:45-9:45 a.m. ~ Mormon Studies and the Internet

James Faulconer, "Professing on the Internet: What’s a Guy to Do?"

Ardis E. Parshall, "Blazing a New Trail: Doing History in the Age of the Internet"

Patrick Mason, "Mormon Blogs, Mormon Studies, and the Mormon Mind"

10:00-11:00 a.m. ~ Keynote Address

Joanna Brooks, “The Challenge of Mormon Studies for the Digital Age"

11:10-12:00 p.m. ~ Panel Discussion

James Faulconer, Ardis E. Parshall, Patrick Mason, and Joanna Brooks

12:00-1:00 p.m. ~ Break for Lunch

1:00-2:15 p.m. ~ Journeys of Faith on the Internet

John Dehlin, "Why Mormons Leave, and How the Internet is Helping"

Scott Gordon, "Fostering Faith and Countering Criticism: The Role of Apologetics in in the Information Age"

Rosemary Avance, "Seeing the Light: Mormon Conversion and Deconversion Narratives in On- and Offline Worlds"

2:30-3:45 p.m. ~ Panel Discussion

John Dehlin, Scott Gordon, and Rosemary Avance

5:30-6:45 p.m. ~ Reception for participants and invited guests

7:00-9:00 p.m. ~ Eugene England Memorial Lecture

Patrick Mason, "'Blessed Are All the Peacemakers': Toward a Mormon Theology and Ethic of Peace"

Friday, March 30th in Library Auditorium

8:30-9:00 a.m. ~ Welcome

9:00-9:50 a.m. ~ Digital Religion and the Public Face of the Church

Buddy Blankenfeld and Lyman Kirkland, "Join the Conversation: Engaging the Media and Public through LDS Newsroom"

Greg Droubay,Who Are These People?: The Story of the ‘I’m a Mormon’ Campaign

10:00-10:50 a.m. ~ Keynote

Alan Cooperman, "Insights from the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life’s Survey of Mormons in America"

11:00-11:50 a.m. ~ From Blogosphere to Bloggernacle

Jana Riess, "One Voice in the Mormon Bloggernacle Choir: A Personal Journey"

Kristine Haglund, "Homemaking as Performance Art in a Gendered Babylon"

12:00-1:00 p.m. ~ Break for Lunch

1:00-1:50 p.m. ~ Avatars and Second Life: Mormon Identity and the Internet

David Charles, "Digital Religion, Convergence, and Pluralism"

Gideon Burton, "Evolving Mormon Identity in the Digital Age"

David Scott, "Seeing is Believing: The Virtual Construction of Mormon Identity and Belief in Second Life"

2:00-3:00 p.m. ~ Panel Discussion

Jana Riess, Kristine Haglund, David Charles, Gideon Burton, David Scott

For more information, contact Boyd Petersen at boyd.petersen@uvu.edu

wenglund Grand Master

wenglund

Posted
Posted

As I listened to John Dehlin speak and participate in the panel discussion, I was struck by how divergent his understanding is to mine as to what the gospel/church is all about. It was astonishing.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

juliann Grand Master

juliann

Posted
Posted (edited)

Unfortunately, Dehlin's study is so unscientific it has no more value than the inflammatory anecdotes he spent so much time relating. [edit: Wade, I think that is the problem. He obviously craves understanding yet he picks the most outrageous, hard to understand examples possible. I can relate to people who haven't been met with kindness when asking doubting questions in church....but a guy almost killing his family by forgetting to use the stop pedal at a stop sign? Why would he pick that?]

Biggest surprise....that a PhD candidate in psychology would divulge confidential information about someone he counsels. Strangest comment....the term anti-Mormon isn't useful because no one self identifies as one. With that logic we should stop using anti-Semetic and racist.

Enjoyed the individual lectures very much. Dehlin turned the panel into something of a slugfest, unfortunately. I think Brooks is going to be much more effective.

Edited by juliann
1
Calm Grand Master

Calm

Posted
Posted

My husband was able to attend just one session. Alas we had a doctor's appt. for our daughter we could not miss or reschedule this afternoon. He was quite disappointed. I assume it got recorded, any chance for delayed listening?

wenglund Grand Master

wenglund

Posted
Posted (edited)
[edit: Wade, I think that is the problem. He obviously craves understanding yet he picks the most outrageous, hard to understand examples possible.]

Even more amazing, he calls for empathy, compassion, and acceptance, and yet his responses during the panel discussions were filled with uncharitable accusations towards the Church and FAIR, and his body language seemed to betray an undercurrent of hostility and contempt. Surprisingly, he came across to me as confrontational. I don't know if that was because I watch him on-line instead of in person, but that is the impression I got after seeing him for the first time.

Biggest surprise....that a PhD candidate in psychology would divulge confidential information about someone he counsels.

Perhaps he hasn't gotten far enough along in his doctoral program to realize that emotional problems, particularly those severe enough to contemplate suicide, at their core have really nothing to do with the Church, and everything to do with individuals lacking effective coping and cognitive skills, if not also biochemical issues. I am surprised that he didn't get a clue of this when someone posed the salient question about different people interpreting and responding to the same data differently.

Other than this, I enjoyed the presentations and panel discussions as well.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited by wenglund
wenglund Grand Master

wenglund

Posted
Posted

I liked how Rosemary, towards the end of the panel discussion, intimated that it was difficult pinning down LDS doctrine. I wanted to yell through cyberspace: "Yes...and isn't that great!?!"

It is funny how on the one hand certain academics relish diversity of views, yet on the other hand they become frustrated when they can't tie an organization down to a single view.

To me, there is good reason that the Lord didn't reveal his gospel in a systematic and unmistakable way, and left the notion of doctrine, particularly official doctrine, somewhat vague and open to disagreement (see, for example, the various threads discussing what is "official doctrine"), is so as to encourage in-depth thought and prevent artificial limits on the horizons of understanding. :good:

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

David T Veteran

David T

Posted
Posted

Representatives from LDS Newsroom explaining the connection and authoritative connection of that service. Speaking now on "Approaching Mormon Doctrine".

Kevin Christensen Grand Master

Kevin Christensen

Posted
Posted (edited)

Unfortunately, Dehlin's study is so unscientific it has no more value than the inflammatory anecdotes he spent so much time relating. [edit: Wade, I think that is the problem. He obviously craves understanding yet he picks the most outrageous, hard to understand examples possible. I can relate to people who haven't been met with kindness when asking doubting questions in church....but a guy almost killing his family by forgetting to use the stop pedal at a stop sign? Why would he pick that?]

Establishing paradigms, defining myths, describing one's perspectives is all about the examples a person chooses to generalize from. The difference between propaganda and science, between manipulative rhetoric and genuine dialogue, shows up in the validity, or non-validity as the case may be, of the standard examples when applied to the general case. Genuinely broad perspectives and legitimate sampling as a method of gaining understanding is quite different than cherry picking hot button accounts. Lots of people go to Dehlin to share their sad stories of disillusion and pain. It's good that he cares, but let's not forget the non-random aspect, the high rate of self selection from his story pool, and his own selectivity in working with that.

You can tell the same stories to a completely different effect by treating them as exceptions to a general pattern by going into the specifics of what makes them exceptions to the general case. As in, "in this case, something went wrong," rather than , "this case illustrates what is wrong in general." If the desired message is that LDS culture is so toxic that it drives members to involuntary suicide, it's best to tell this kind of story without mentioning the demonstrated fact that active LDS in general are fall less likely to commit suicide.

I think it also has to do with the politics of victimization. To define one's relationship to the church in terms of victimization has the effect of both establishing one's moral advantage and demonizing the institution.

From Rene Girard I See Satan Fall Like Lightning, pages 180-181.

The most powerful anti-Christian movement is the one that takes over and 'radicalizes' the concern for the victim in order to paganize it. The powers and principalities want to be 'revolutionary now, and they reproach Christianity for not defending victims with enough ardor. In Christian history, they see nothing but persecutions, acts of oppression, inquisitions.

This other totalitarianism presents itself as the liberator of humanity. In trying to usurp the place of Christ, the powers imitate him in the way a mimetic rival imitates his model in order to defeat him...

In the symbolic language of the New Testament, we would say that in our world, Satan, trying again to make a new start and gain new triumphs, borrows the language of victims....

The Antichrist boasts of bringing to human beings the peace and tolerance that Christianity has promised but has failed to deliver. Actually what the radicalization of contemporary victimology produces is a return to all sorts of pagan practices: abortion, euthanasia, sexual undifferentiation, Roman circus games galore but without real victims, etc.

Neo-paganism would like to turn the Ten Commandments and all of Judeo-Christian morality into some alleged intolerable violance, and indeed its primary objective is their complete abolition. Faithful observance of the moral law is perceived as complicity with the forces of persecution that are essentially religious....

Neo-paganism locates happiness in the unlimited satisfaction of desires, which means the suppression of all prohibitions.

Girard has also observed that historically speaking, widespread social concern for innocent victims derives from the rise of Christianity. As a consequence, in order to scapegoat some group, (preferably, in this case, a relatively vulnerable "other") for some social ill, they must first be depicted as perpetrators. Once a group or individual is labeled as perps, the old scapegoating process can carry on. Hence, the deterimination that some have for depicting Joseph Smith as a perp who forced 14 year old girls into marriage, and never mind that the 14 year old was an exception who insisted that Joseph did nothing wrong. Hence the post-Prop 8 backlash focus on LDS. Hence the fixation on stories of reparative therapy in the seventies without any consideration of the difference that 12 Step recovery in current use can make in dealing with the same issues. Hence, the "Mormons are racists because they once were racists" card, as though we invented the concept and thus corrupted an otherwise utopian culture.

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

Edited by Kevin Christensen
2
HiJolly Proficient

HiJolly

Posted
Posted

It's currently on the live events feed as linked above...

shall I blame my lack of access on CenturyLink DSL? AGH.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...