Anti-Intellectualism And The Church

[Stone holm]

I have noted elsewhere that there is an element in the Church which waxes and wanes at times which tends to attack intellectualism, scientific inquiry, and secular thought altogether. The question I have in my mind is not so much whether this element is correct in their beliefs, as to why the waxing and waning of this element occurs in a Church which is so hierarchial. Comments?

[tagriffy]

My thought is that it waxes and wanes for the same reason anti-intellectualism waxes and wanes in American society as a whole--the perception of some kind of threat from intellectual circles. It would be interesting to see how well the Church's anti-intellectual periods tracks with the rest of American society.

[blackstrap]

I wonder if those who opposed the intellectuals in the universities of the 1920's who embraced eugenics ,would be considered anti-intellectual ? Based on their worldview, the eugenicists were only following the logical and rational position. Fortunately, a different worldview prevailed. From my limited observation of intellectuals ,the true intelligences recognize just how little they know. The others are ready to charge off in all directions , assured by the assumption that they are superior in all ways to the great unwashed.

Edited June 17, 2013 by blackstrap

[blackstrap]

Consider this quote : Argument and debate are common in science, yet they are virtually absent from science education.... As one of the hallmarks of the scientist is critical, rational skepticism, the lack of opportunities to develop the ability to reason and argue scientifically would appear to be a significant weakness in contemporary educational practice. In short, knowing what is wrong matters as much as knowing what is right. — Jonathan Osborne, “Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse," Science Magazine, April 23, 2010 - To me , opposition to some 'scientific' ideas is not anti-intellectual , but pro science . That is not to say that there are not some ideas that can safely be set aside.

[The Nehor]

In my experience the self-proclaimed "intellectuals" who claim mistreatment by the church or insist they are persecuted are unworthy of the title they claim.

Of course I have also found that anyone having to insist that they are an intellectual (even in circles unconnected to the LDS faith) is almost invariably suffering from delusions of grandeur brought on by a crippling inferiority complex. Admittedly this is an amateur diagnosis but the symptoms fit.

[volgadon]

Some interesting thoughts from my good friend, Walker Wright.

http://www.withoutend.org/boss-critique-nibleys-leaders-managers/

[Robert F. Smith]

I wonder if those who opposed the intellectuals in the universities of the 1920's who embraced eugenics ,would be considered anti-intellectual ? Based on their worldview, the eugenicists were only following the logical and rational position. Fortunately, a different worldview prevailed. From my limited observation of intellectuals ,the true intelligences recognize just how little they know. The others are ready to charge off in all directions , assured by the assumption that they are superior in all ways to the great unwashed.

What is truly frightening is the fact of the best minds in America agreeing with the best minds in Europe that eugenics was the answer, which was then implemented in both regions. Adolf Hitler, who was not the author of the idea, merely took eugenics to its logical conclusion. Germany was, after all, the most advanced, artistic, and intellectual country in the world. How is it possible that they could make such a catastrophic mistake?

[Robert F. Smith]

Stone holm said:

I have noted elsewhere that there is an element in the Church which waxes and wanes at times which tends to attack intellectualism, scientific inquiry, and secular thought altogether. The question I have in my mind is not so much whether this element is correct in their beliefs, as to why the waxing and waning of this element occurs in a Church which is so hierarchial. Comments?

My thought is that it waxes and wanes for the same reason anti-intellectualism waxes and wanes in American society as a whole--the perception of some kind of threat from intellectual circles. It would be interesting to see how well the Church's anti-intellectual periods tracks with the rest of American society.

This waxing and waning thing you guys are talking about: I just don't see it. What I see instead is a phenomenon similar to the early series of rabbinic pairs in opposition to each other, beginning with Hillel & Shammai -- who were contemporaries of Jesus.

Joseph had to endure plenty of opposition to his ideas from those close to him, followed by Brigham and Orson who were famously at loggerheads. We had the thought of James Talmage & John Widtsoe set over against Joseph Fielding Smith. In the midst of that we had the extraordinary intellectual work of defending the Church by first B. H. Roberts and then Hugh W. Nibley covering virtually the entire 20th century, and they faced plenty of opposition from within the Church -- Nibley an ardent social critic in addition to his rampant apologetic activities. Even now within the LDS Church such warfare continues over whether one set of ideas about the LDS Canon will prevail against another set of ideas.

The LDS hoi polloi are not directly involved in that debate, and clearly do not understand what is taking place. What is clear from careful research is that, as religious bodies go, the LDS has a much higher average level of education among its members than most other groups. Of course the Jewish and Asian communities have the highest level of educational attainment of any groups -- perhaps for very traditional reasons.

[Robert F. Smith]

Some interesting thoughts from my good friend, Walker Wright.

http://www.withouten...aders-managers/

A very worthwhile and learned discussion. Thanks, Bro.

[volgadon]

A very worthwhile and learned discussion. Thanks, Bro.

Walker has very good insights and always makes a reasoned and reasonable case. I'm glad you enjoyed it. One wishes that Nibley were around to engage in the discussion himself.

[Robert F. Smith]

Walker has very good insights and always makes a reasoned and reasonable case. I'm glad you enjoyed it. One wishes that Nibley were around to engage in the discussion himself.

I'm sure he's smiling broadly and maybe even chuckling at the irony.

[Stone holm]

This waxing and waning thing you guys are talking about: I just don't see it. What I see instead is a phenomenon similar to the early series of rabbinic pairs in opposition to each other, beginning with Hillel & Shammai -- who were contemporaries of Jesus.

Joseph had to endure plenty of opposition to his ideas from those close to him, followed by Brigham and Orson who were famously at loggerheads. We had the thought of James Talmage & John Widtsoe set over against Joseph Fielding Smith. In the midst of that we had the extraordinary intellectual work of defending the Church by first B. H. Roberts and then Hugh W. Nibley covering virtually the entire 20th century, and they faced plenty of opposition from within the Church -- Nibley an ardent social critic in addition to his rampant apologetic activities. Even now within the LDS Church such warfare continues over whether one set of ideas about the LDS Canon will prevail against another set of ideas.

The LDS hoi polloi are not directly involved in that debate, and clearly do not understand what is taking place. What is clear from careful research is that, as religious bodies go, the LDS has a much higher average level of education among its members than most other groups. Of course the Jewish and Asian communities have the highest level of educational attainment of any groups -- perhaps for very traditional reasons.

It is interesting that around the time of Vatican II , the Pope mused the complaint as to why the Catholic Church was not producing the same number of intellectuals as Judaism listing off Einstein, etc. At the time later when I heard of this I thought, hm, the branch of the U.S. Government most noted for its intellectual levels, the judiciary, is dominated by Catholics and Jews.

[Stone holm]

I wonder if those who opposed the intellectuals in the universities of the 1920's who embraced eugenics ,would be considered anti-intellectual ? Based on their worldview, the eugenicists were only following the logical and rational position. Fortunately, a different worldview prevailed. From my limited observation of intellectuals ,the true intelligences recognize just how little they know. The others are ready to charge off in all directions , assured by the assumption that they are superior in all ways to the great unwashed.

Interesting, never thought of Calvin Coolidge as an intellectual. But you do see some of the ideas behind a super race being expressed in a defence of polygamy in the Comprehensive History of the Church.

[Stone holm]

Consider this quote : Argument and debate are common in science, yet they are virtually absent from science education.... As one of the hallmarks of the scientist is critical, rational skepticism, the lack of opportunities to develop the ability to reason and argue scientifically would appear to be a significant weakness in contemporary educational practice. In short, knowing what is wrong matters as much as knowing what is right. — Jonathan Osborne, “Arguing to Learn in Science: The Role of Collaborative, Critical Discourse," Science Magazine, April 23, 2010 - To me , opposition to some 'scientific' ideas is not anti-intellectual , but pro science . That is not to say that there are not some ideas that can safely be set aside.

American education at the primary, secondary and even the undergraduate level is not necessarily aimed at creative thinking, but rather at mastering the fundamentals of a particular discipline. The debate amongst the scientists is there, it is just that the cutting edge of debates is often moved on from where society is at as a whole. For example while society still is in some circles still debating climate change, amongst the scientists it has moved on to a vigorous debate as to the best way to deal with it. In other places such as the GMO debate, you see some pretty vicious fights going on as to the wisdom ethically and the efficacy scientifically of genetically modified organisms. That is a debate that has not yet reached consensus so they have not yet moved on. However, people get frustrated that scientists are unwilling to engage on issues like the young earth theory -- the problem there is that little to no new evidence is coming forward which supports the theory, so there is no real reason, other than religious fundamentalism, to reopen the debate.

There are some education reform movements afoot which are indicating that we are eliminating the courses in the lower education levels that teach creativity, namely the arts and certain humanities such as literature, and that this is putting national security at risk. It is true that in order to de-politicize education we have moved towards an emphasis on science, math and English. Science can be creative and obviously has been the most creative area for decades, however, unfortunately you have to master the basics first before the debate is productive. Otherwise you wind up with a lot of popular faux science.

[tagriffy]

This waxing and waning thing you guys are talking about: I just don't see it. What I see instead is a phenomenon similar to the early series of rabbinic pairs in opposition to each other, beginning with Hillel & Shammai -- who were contemporaries of Jesus.

Joseph had to endure plenty of opposition to his ideas from those close to him, followed by Brigham and Orson who were famously at loggerheads. We had the thought of James Talmage & John Widtsoe set over against Joseph Fielding Smith. In the midst of that we had the extraordinary intellectual work of defending the Church by first B. H. Roberts and then Hugh W. Nibley covering virtually the entire 20th century, and they faced plenty of opposition from within the Church -- Nibley an ardent social critic in addition to his rampant apologetic activities. Even now within the LDS Church such warfare continues over whether one set of ideas about the LDS Canon will prevail against another set of ideas.

The LDS hoi polloi are not directly involved in that debate, and clearly do not understand what is taking place. What is clear from careful research is that, as religious bodies go, the LDS has a much higher average level of education among its members than most other groups. Of course the Jewish and Asian communities have the highest level of educational attainment of any groups -- perhaps for very traditional reasons.

This is true enough, even for American society as a whole. Nevertheless, it is hard to deny that the ascendency of one side or the other has waxed and waned over time. I would still be interested to see how well the Church's periods compare to that of American society as a whole.

[thesometimesaint]

What is truly frightening is the fact of the best minds in America agreeing with the best minds in Europe that eugenics was the answer, which was then implemented in both regions. Adolf Hitler, who was not the author of the idea, merely took eugenics to its logical conclusion. Germany was, after all, the most advanced, artistic, and intellectual country in the world. How is it possible that they could make such a catastrophic mistake?

A mad man with a weapon is still a mad man. The US used the German V-2 to launch its man on the moon program.

[Stone holm]

This is true enough, even for American society as a whole. Nevertheless, it is hard to deny that the ascendency of one side or the other has waxed and waned over time. I would still be interested to see how well the Church's periods compare to that of American society as a whole.

I think there may be a pendulum effect that goes on in society and in the Church, not sure how one would measure it. It may be a natural safety check that the Lord has built into both society and the Church. Intellectuals thrive on debate and pushing the envelope, so the more conservative element may be there to pull society back from the brink and this overcompensates and pushes society too far in the other direction, which is then followed by a creative burst. If I am correct, then we may be at the conservative end of the swing and commencing a swing back towards allowing more speculative thought. Mormons on average tend to be better educated than their peers in other American Christian sects -- so we would expect to see the pendulum being in motion more rapidly, I think. The pendulum appeared to swing towards more intellectual tolerance under President McKay and may have reversed course under President Joseph Fielding Smith...where it went from there I think it might be dangerous to the thread to speculate.

[Stone holm]

A mad man with a weapon is still a mad man. The US used the German V-2 to launch its man on the moon program.

Yeah we borrowed Werner Von Braun under Operation Paperclip at the end of the war so that he could be the father of our space program. There is an argument that we beat the Russians because we stole more and better scientists from the defeated than the Russians did.

[volgadon]

[thesometimesaint]

Yeah we borrowed Werner Von Braun under Operation Paperclip at the end of the war so that he could be the father of our space program. There is an argument that we beat the Russians because we stole more and better scientists from the defeated than the Russians did.

As a teenager actually met Werner Von Braun. It was an interesting time for our family. My dad was in the Air Force, lived on an Army Post, while working for the civilian agency NASA.

It was the Russians whom stole more, and debatable if they were better. The list of Russian firsts is impressive and long. IE; They had land landings decades before we did. We just dropped ours in the ocean until the Space Shuttle.

My personal idea is that we did it dirty and cheap. Still quite an accomplishment. We and the Russians soon lost interest not long after the first Moon landing.

[Stone holm]

As a teenager actually met Werner Von Braun. It was an interesting time for our family. My dad was in the Air Force, lived on an Army Post, while working for the civilian agency NASA.

It was the Russians whom stole more, and debatable if they were better. The list of Russian firsts is impressive and long. IE; They had land landings decades before we did. We just dropped ours in the ocean until the Space Shuttle.

My personal idea is that we did it dirty and cheap. Still quite an accomplishment. We and the Russians soon lost interest not long after the first Moon landing.

I would have to disagree with that, the Soviets were just more willing to risk cosmonaut lives. Not sure who actually stole the greatest number of scientists, but we most likely treated the ones we stole better than the Soviets. We can thank the rat lines for our ability to snag a lot of them and I suspect that the Soviets did not have as good of an access to the rat lines as we did.

[volgadon]

we most likely treated the ones we stole better than the Soviets.

The high-ranking scientists were treated quite well by both sides.

[thesometimesaint]

I don't know as they were more willing. Anyone volunteering to strap their behind to a bomb and go into space is more than a little nuts. We lived 6 miles from the booster test facility in Huntsville; Ala. When they light those candles it was heard 90 miles away in Birmingham; Ala.

The Astronauts, Cosmonauts, and support staff of both countries were treated as hero's. Russia's big problem was they couldn't do both the Space Program, and keep up with consumer demand at the same time.

The aftermath of WW2 was a very different time than ours. Some willingly went to either side, and others fled from either side. Both sides captured as many as they could.

[Stone holm]

I don't know as they were more willing. Anyone volunteering to strap their behind to a bomb and go into space is more than a little nuts. We lived 6 miles from the booster test facility in Huntsville; Ala. When they light those candles it was heard 90 miles away in Birmingham; Ala.

The Astronauts, Cosmonauts, and support staff of both countries were treated as hero's. Russia's big problem was they couldn't do both the Space Program, and keep up with consumer demand at the same time.

The aftermath of WW2 was a very different time than ours. Some willingly went to either side, and others fled from either side. Both sides captured as many as they could.

They treated the ones that survived as heroes, the ones whose blood turned to soda pop in space or worse were kept from the public eye. In America we were transparent, so that if we cooked an astronaut either at launch or in space, everybody saw it on TV.

[thesometimesaint]

They treated the ones that survived as heroes, the ones whose blood turned to soda pop in space or worse were kept from the public eye. In America we were transparent, so that if we cooked an astronaut either at launch or in space, everybody saw it on TV.

The Russians have always been more paranoid than Americans. Considering their history I'm not surprised.

My father was part of the investigatory team that diagnosed the Saturn 1 tragedy. While everyone knew that something terrible had happened the proceedings were not so transparent. I doubt even today more than a few know the real cause of that tragedy. A pure oxygen environment coupled with a spark from an electrical short caused by a dropped socket from a socket wrench. So a 50 cent chunk of metal cost 3 lives and millions of dollars. Interestingly if they were in space simply opening a door would have saved them.