Paid Apologetics?

[Calm]

MY HEAD HURTS...

I just don't understand how someone as brilliant as you are can have such an aversion to the most perfect creation in all the universe.

Then again before kindergarten my son was playing with square roots and negative numbers but his reading ability stunk.

[emarkp]

I have been told that the more I learn in Calculus the more amazed I will be at this "gift from God" to us.

One of my most spiritual experiences I had in high school happened in conjunction with understanding the equivalence between a photon rushing towards the ground and a photon rushing at the floor of an accelerating elevator.

I strongly recommend reading the first 6 of Feynman's lectures on physics and then lecture 22 simply titled "Algebra" - that chapter answered many deep questions I had (raising a number to an irrational or imaginary exponent, why the algebraic and geometric formulae for the dot and cross products are equivalent, etc.).

[volgadon]

I just don't understand how someone as brilliant as you are can have such an aversion to the most perfect creation in all the universe.

Then again before kindergarten my son was playing with square roots and negative numbers but his reading ability stunk.

I was just the opposite. Taught myself to read when I was three, and haven't looked back since. As for math, I have dyscalculia. Ironic, as my grandparents were all utterly brilliant with math.

Edited March 9, 2013 by volgadon

[Robert F. Smith]

Thanks. I am fascinated that after all these years of thinking it was beyond me that it isn't. I actually am making decent progress in understanding a ton of Algebra, Trigonometry, and Calculus that I never before even imagined existed. That I can actually comprehend taking derivatives and now know in a minor way how to do so, or to integrate the areas under curves is truly totally THRILLING to me to finally be learning the math I always wanted to. I am deeply impressed and this is growing daily at the ways and how much mathematics jives with physics in describing our world and how it works, our universe and how it works. Physical reality is truly the most amazing teacher we have in this life, and it is a delight for me to be learning it's language and science. I am ***SERIOUSLY*** impressed with the pure genius of so many of the mathematicians as they demonstrated and proved how the formulas are correct and how it advances our understanding of the world and universe. It is utterly breath taking how fabulous and helpful these formulas are turning out to be, and I am only a few months into it! I have been told that the more I learn in Calculus the more amazed I will be at this "gift from God" to us.

By the way, Kerry, aside from all the psychological benefits, such study is also physically good for you. Your brain grows when you systematically learn new and complex things. Such activity is also good at keeping the plaques of Alzheimers at bay.

[Calm]

I was just the opposite. Taught myself to read when I was three, and haven't looked back since. As for math, I have dyscalculia. Ironic, as my grandparents were all utterly brilliant with math.

Oh well, no wonder then. How unfortunate. To me it would almost be like being colourblind. However, language is a equal glory to play with so I only really feel bad for those who hate both.

[Kerry A. Shirts]

By the way, Kerry, aside from all the psychological benefits, such study is also physically good for you. Your brain grows when you systematically learn new and complex things. Such activity is also good at keeping the plaques of Alzheimers at bay.

Yes Robert but that means I really, REALLY have to learn a TON of math to wipe off all the slog that has accumulated in my brains! On a serious note, I actually remember recently reading something about this though. If one learns a new subject or two or 25 of them it makes new connections between brain neurons that were not there before, etc. So the more new info one learns the more brain cells one connects and staves off Alzheimer's. It is wonderful to think that.

[Sleeper Cell]

Thanks. I am fascinated that after all these years of thinking it was beyond me that it isn't. I actually am making decent progress in understanding a ton of Algebra, Trigonometry, and Calculus that I never before even imagined existed. That I can actually comprehend taking derivatives and now know in a minor way how to do so, or to integrate the areas under curves is truly totally THRILLING to me to finally be learning the math I always wanted to. I am deeply impressed and this is growing daily at the ways and how much mathematics jives with physics in describing our world and how it works, our universe and how it works. Physical reality is truly the most amazing teacher we have in this life, and it is a delight for me to be learning it's language and science. I am ***SERIOUSLY*** impressed with the pure genius of so many of the mathematicians as they demonstrated and proved how the formulas are correct and how it advances our understanding of the world and universe. It is utterly breath taking how fabulous and helpful these formulas are turning out to be, and I am only a few months into it! I have been told that the more I learn in Calculus the more amazed I will be at this "gift from God" to us.

One of the things that surprised me is that once you get the hang of it, calculus is much easier than algebra. In fact, when one encounters a particularly difficult calculus problem, the difficulty usually involves doing the necessary algebraic or trig manipulations rather than the actual calculus.

Then there is the old saying to the effect that so-and-so is “so smart that he does calculus problems in his head“. By now, you probably realize that every calculus student can do a lot of calculus problems in his head.

Of course, some problems and proofs do require a lot of hard work and there are still times when what is intuitively obvious to the instructor is not necessarily intuitively obvious to the student.

Quick story:

After several hours of getting nowhere with one of our homework problems, a classmate asked the instructor to show us how to solve it. He wrote the integral on the board, stared at if for a bit, then immediately wrote down the answer without showing any steps in his reasoning. Since the answer was already in the back of our text, this did us a fat lot of good. Some smart alec student (guess who?) asked “excuse me, sir, isn’t there another way to solve that problem?” The startled instructor stared at the problem, frowned, slowly erased the answer, stared at it some more, and then said, :“you’re right. Very ingenious, young man.” And he immediately wrote down the same answer.

[Calm]

Quick story:

After several hours of getting nowhere with one of our homework problems, a classmate asked the instructor to show us how to solve it. He wrote the integral on the board, stared at if for a bit, then immediately wrote down the answer without showing any steps in his reasoning. Since the answer was already in the back of our text, this did us a fat lot of good. Some smart alec student (guess who?) asked “excuse me, sir, isn’t there another way to solve that problem?” The startled instructor stared at the problem, frowned, slowly erased the answer, stared at it some more, and then said, :“you’re right. Very ingenious, young man.” And he immediately wrote down the same answer.

I happened to take a derivatives class along with my older brother one year in college. As he was just married, he missed a lot of classes so I tutored him on occasion. I was doing the same thing to him though not quite so badly, just left out several steps that were so selfevident to me that I didn't even think them through. When he insisted I show him how I got from 'here' to 'there', it took some great effort on my part to actually identify what I had done.

I think this can apply to many things in our lives that have become a natural part of our actions. It saves a lot of time and energy, but it can also prevent us from straying from the path of righteousness because we don't even think about other choices that tempt us. The key is not to allow it to become so natural that when presented with a situation that requires more detailed thinking that we are unable to do so and thus just respond in an automatic, kneejerk way that doesn't address the real issues.

[Five Solas]

That's how I see it. However, one could certainly argue that these people are using facilities and time they are being paid to use and in that sense they're being paid. BUt it's an incredibly weak criticism. So weak that it's not unreasonable to argue that yes, they are not being paid for apologetics.

I could not have said it any better, BCSpace. Despite your subsequent efforts to soften the obvious, I think we both see there's no other sense than "that sense"--as you put it. So a sincere thanks.

BYU pays for the facilities & BYU pays for the time of its professors. Yes, property, buildings and equipment may be cheap in Provo (I don’t know). And yes, BYU may not have to pay much for its staff (again, I don’t know). But one thing is certain—those resources and those hours cost something, as you recognize.

If professors use BYU’s resources poorly (i.e., meeting their publishing commitments in second tier/”unscholarly” venues, such as FARMS)—then they get below average raises. But they’re still publishing! They’re still getting paid! The point is not whether they’re satisfied with their compensation or whether they could have earned more doing other things.

Obviously we don't have a lot of company on the thread. nealr, mfbukowski, Glenn101 and Pahoran (forgive me if I left anyone out) all assert that that there was zero (or even negative) consideration/compensation for Dr. Hamblin’s work in this second tier. And I’ve never worked at BYU, so difficult for me to prove them wrong. But when you read Dr. Hamblin, it certainly appears as though he would have gladly remained on at MI if BYU admins had agreed to afford it first tier status (with attendant consideration & compensation).

I think we're right, BCSpace. And I'm going to hang in there. But I don't think I've much more to add to this thread.

--Erik

[Calm]

BYU pays for the time of its professors.

Are you saying that BYU basically owns their professors 24/7? That there is no leisure time during which they can pursue their own preferences, whatever they are?

[Five Solas]

Are you saying that BYU basically owns their professors 24/7? That there is no leisure time during which they can pursue their own preferences, whatever they are?

No, that's not what I'm saying (and I'm pretty sure BCSpace wasn't saying it either)

[Calm]

No, that's not what I'm saying (and I'm pretty sure BCSpace wasn't saying it either)

If they spend their free time on apologetics, then they are not being paid for it, are they?

[Five Solas]

If they spend their free time on apologetics, then they are not being paid for it, are they?

If your assertion was correct--then Dr. Hamblin's apologetic publishing wouldn't be the business of BYU adminsistrators, would it?

But it is the business of BYU admins, isn't it?

--Erik

[Glenn101]

If your assertion was correct--then Dr. Hamblin's apologetic publishing wouldn't be the business of BYU adminsistrators, would it?

But it is the business of BYU admins, isn't it?

--Erik

Actually it really is not the business of the BYU administrators. They have made it their business, and I believe they have done so unethically, to some extent. But you are stretching ths logic very thin there.

Glenn

[webbles]

If your assertion was correct--then Dr. Hamblin's apologetic publishing wouldn't be the business of BYU adminsistrators, would it?

But it is the business of BYU admins, isn't it?

--Erik

Imagine I'm in an engineering field (which I am, by the way). As part of that field, I will attend conferences and publish on the internet (in my blog or as an open source contributor). All of this, I do on my own spare time and my own expense (well, some conferences might be paid by the company but not all). So I would not consider my company paying me for my blog writings, my open source contribution, nor my conference attendance/talks. But when I have my annual discussion with my manager, my participation in those things help me get raises and bonuses. It is showing to my manager that I'm getting better and because it raises the visibility of my company since I also mention my company in some of the things. If I wasn't doing those things, I'd probably not get the best raise I could get. And if I was attending conferences or writing things on my blog that my manager doesn't like, I'd also not get the best raise.

That's how I see this situation (and it seems that is what Daniel Peterson was talking about in #3). The work I do in my free time does affect my raises and promotions. I even kind of plan what things I should do in my spare time to maximize the benefits. But I would not consider my company paying me for that extra work.

[Robert F. Smith]

BCSpace, on 03 March 2013 - 09:17 PM, said:

That's how I see it. However, one could certainly argue that these people are using facilities and time they are being paid to use and in that sense they're being paid. BUt it's an incredibly weak criticism. So weak that it's not unreasonable to argue that yes, they are not being paid for apologetics.

I could not have said it any better, BCSpace. Despite your subsequent efforts to soften the obvious, I think we both see there's no other sense than "that sense"--as you put it. So a sincere thanks.

BYU pays for the facilities & BYU pays for the time of its professors. Yes, property, buildings and equipment may be cheap in Provo (I don’t know). And yes, BYU may not have to pay much for its staff (again, I don’t know). But one thing is certain—those resources and those hours cost something, as you recognize.

If professors use BYU’s resources poorly (i.e., meeting their publishing commitments in second tier/”unscholarly” venues, such as FARMS)—then they get below average raises. But they’re still publishing! They’re still getting paid! The point is not whether they’re satisfied with their compensation or whether they could have earned more doing other things.

Obviously we don't have a lot of company on the thread. nealr, mfbukowski, Glenn101 and Pahoran (forgive me if I left anyone out) all assert that that there was zero (or even negative) consideration/compensation for Dr. Hamblin’s work in this second tier. And I’ve never worked at BYU, so difficult for me to prove them wrong. But when you read Dr. Hamblin, it certainly appears as though he would have gladly remained on at MI if BYU admins had agreed to afford it first tier status (with attendant consideration & compensation).

I think we're right, BCSpace. And I'm going to hang in there. But I don't think I've much more to add to this thread.

--Erik

It might be helpful to note, Erik, that as at other universities, professors at BYU are not paid for their time. They are salaried and expected to carry a certain load of teaching. They also advance in rank and pay based on performance in a number of areas. Those who are pure researchers are paid a salary as well and expected to perform according to certain fixed expectations. Since BYU is not a university engaged in a lot of heavy research (the Univ. of California system, for example, is engaged in a lot of heavy research), teaching is the primary function.

Contrary to your stated understanding, Prof. Hamblin (BYU History Dept) has never worked for or been compensated by the Maxwell Institute, so any question of his "staying on" is absurd. Moreover, any apologetic activities he undertook were on his own time, not on that of BYU, and he was not compensated for them in any case. This designation of some scholarly activities as "second tier" seems invidious to me, a value judgment with an emotional edge. Indeed, Hamblin has been publishing mainstream books with prestigious publishing houses and has nothing to be ashamed of -- typical university politics to the contrary nothwithstanding.

[Robert F. Smith]

If your assertion was correct--then Dr. Hamblin's apologetic publishing wouldn't be the business of BYU adminsistrators, would it?

But it is the business of BYU admins, isn't it?

--Erik

Yes and No, Erik. Unlike other schools and universities, BYU professors do not actually have tenure. Anything they do on their free time is considered to reflect on the university. In that sense, yes, it is the business of the administrators.

[Calm]

Yes and No, Erik. Unlike other schools and universities, BYU professors do not actually have tenure. Anything they do on their free time is considered to reflect on the university. In that sense, yes, it is the business of the administrators.

It is somewhat like having afterschool/extracurricular activities having an effect on whether or not someone is accepted into college even though those activities may be of no real academic relevancy.

LDS BYU professors are required to have temple recommends, but it hardly follows that their activities in order to be eligible for those recommends (like remaining faithful to their spouses) are somehow paid for by the university.

[Five Solas]

BCSpace, on 03 March 2013 - 09:17 PM, said:

That's how I see it. However, one could certainly argue that these people are using facilities and time they are being paid to use and in that sense they're being paid. BUt it's an incredibly weak criticism. So weak that it's not unreasonable to argue that yes, they are not being paid for apologetics.

It might be helpful to note, Erik, that as at other universities, professors at BYU are not paid for their time. They are salaried and expected to carry a certain load of teaching. They also advance in rank and pay based on performance in a number of areas. Those who are pure researchers are paid a salary as well and expected to perform according to certain fixed expectations. Since BYU is not a university engaged in a lot of heavy research (the Univ. of California system, for example, is engaged in a lot of heavy research), teaching is the primary function.

Contrary to your stated understanding, Prof. Hamblin (BYU History Dept) has never worked for or been compensated by the Maxwell Institute, so any question of his "staying on" is absurd. Moreover, any apologetic activities he undertook were on his own time, not on that of BYU, and he was not compensated for them in any case. This designation of some scholarly activities as "second tier" seems invidious to me, a value judgment with an emotional edge. Indeed, Hamblin has been publishing mainstream books with prestigious publishing houses and has nothing to be ashamed of -- typical university politics to the contrary nothwithstanding.

By MI, I meant Mormon Interpreter, not Maxwell Institute, so I apologize for the confusion. So his "staying on" makes sense in the context I had in my head.

At this point I'm willing to concede BYU may be a special case & that I've read it wrong. My only real experience with BYU was being invited for a "Y Weekend" when I was a high school student. Got to meet with student body officers, see their production studio, and then spent an evening at Plastique (or however you spell it--an all-ages discotheque that is long gone--maybe someone here would remember it). They pulled out all the stops to entertain us & it was a good show. But I couldn't see myself there.

Regards,

--Erik

[Robert F. Smith]

By MI, I meant Mormon Interpreter, not Maxwell Institute, so I apologize for the confusion. So his "staying on" makes sense in the context I had in my head.

At this point I'm willing to concede BYU may be a special case & that I've read it wrong. My only real experience with BYU was being invited for a "Y Weekend" when I was a high school student. Got to meet with student body officers, see their production studio, and then spent an evening at Plastique (or however you spell it--an all-ages discotheque that is long gone--maybe someone here would remember it). They pulled out all the stops to entertain us & it was a good show. But I couldn't see myself there.

Regards,

--Erik

Yeh, BYU is not a fit for everyone.

That http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/ has become "Mormon Interpreter" and now "MI" is an astonishing gaffe by those founding it. They should have seen the problem at the outset. An understandable error. I personally prefer that the Maxwell Institute (MI) be known as NAMIRS -- Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship. We have enough confusion as it is.

[Daniel Peterson]

By MI, I meant Mormon Interpreter, not Maxwell Institute, so I apologize for the confusion.

I'm confused, too.

What is "Mormon Interpreter"?

[Scott Lloyd]

Yeh, BYU is not a fit for everyone.

That http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/ has become "Mormon Interpreter" and now "MI" is an astonishing gaffe by those founding it. They should have seen the problem at the outset. An understandable error.

I don't see it so much as a gaffe by the founders as it is invincible ignorance on the part of those who ignore or resist correction. A URL does not amount to a proper name.

Just so everyone is clear, the name is Interpreter: a Journal of Mormon Scripture.

This reminds me of those who keep calling the Church Plaza in downtown Salt Lake City "Main Street Plaza." That never was the name given to it by its owner and developer. Yet news organizations and others continue to give it that label, capitalizing "Plaza" in "Main Street Plaza" it as though that were the proper name.

Edited March 11, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Avatar4321]

Wait, we can get paid?

[Stone holm]

At one point in time I had the naive belief that colleges should primarily be interested in educating their students and that their reputations depended primarily upon the quality of their graduates, not the writing ability or research fame of their instructors. But unfortunately the cult of personality which has wrecked havoc in the corporate world is doing the same in the collegiate as well. Perhaps it is time for BYU administrators to recognize that BYU is primarily known for its effective work as a Mormon marriage mill and just get over themselves.

[Pahoran]

I could not have said it any better, BCSpace. Despite your subsequent efforts to soften the obvious, I think we both see there's no other sense than "that sense"--as you put it. So a sincere thanks.

BYU pays for the facilities & BYU pays for the time of its professors. Yes, property, buildings and equipment may be cheap in Provo (I don’t know). And yes, BYU may not have to pay much for its staff (again, I don’t know). But one thing is certain—those resources and those hours cost something, as you recognize.

If professors use BYU’s resources poorly (i.e., meeting their publishing commitments in second tier/”unscholarly” venues, such as FARMS)—then they get below average raises. But they’re still publishing! They’re still getting paid! The point is not whether they’re satisfied with their compensation or whether they could have earned more doing other things.

Obviously we don't have a lot of company on the thread. nealr, mfbukowski, Glenn101 and Pahoran (forgive me if I left anyone out) all assert that that there was zero (or even negative) consideration/compensation for Dr. Hamblin’s work in this second tier. And I’ve never worked at BYU, so difficult for me to prove them wrong. But when you read Dr. Hamblin, it certainly appears as though he would have gladly remained on at MI if BYU admins had agreed to afford it first tier status (with attendant consideration & compensation).

I think we're right, BCSpace. And I'm going to hang in there. But I don't think I've much more to add to this thread.

--Erik

I don't think you ever had anything to say in the first place.

As you know, Professor Hamblin was never paid for his apologetic activities. As you know, he continued his apologetic activities for years, all the while knowing that they actually restricted his earning capability and held back his advancement opportunities.

My town has a volunteer fire brigade; the members are not paid for their work. They are either employed in local jobs, or else they are self-employed people.

Most employers recognise the value of the fire brigade to the community. They allow their employees to take time off to respond to emergencies, have training days and other things of that nature. They are proud of their employees' involvement in an important community group, and are proud to support them therein.

So, is anyone going to claim that the volunteer firefighters are "really" paid for their unpaid work?

I suppose if some really snotty, uber-pharisaical individual wanted to be pedantic far beyond the point of honesty, they might try to make that argument. But nobody would really believe it, including themselves.

Now it's also possible -- although I've never heard of any -- that there might exist some employers who resent their employees' involvement in the fire brigade. Such employers might dock the wages of waged employees, limit salary increases for salaried employees, and restrict promotion opportunities for both, in order to discourage participation.

I ask you: would anybody -- including our hypothetical snotty uber-pharisee described above -- argue that those unpaid firefighters are "really" paid?

Nah. Nobody could possibly be that obtuse.

Could they?

Regards,

Pahoran