Scott Lloyd Posted November 2, 2015 Author Posted November 2, 2015 What is anecdotal evidence? I am not following you. What does your 'it' refer to?I'll go to Wikipedia on this: Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes. Where only one or a few anecdotes are presented, there is a larger chance that they may be unreliable due to cherry-picked or otherwise non-representative samples of typical cases.[1][2] Anecdotal evidence is considered dubious support of a generalized claim; it is, however, within the scope of scientific method for claims regarding particular instances, for example the use of case studies in medicine.
Buckeye Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 I've never thought of that before. I think one of the things the church struggles with is the inability to accommodate local culture and practice, instead preferring to make everything into a correlated close of US worship. Give it time. To date, most all of the "strength" from the distant trees has either been brought back to Utah (1800s) or has been needed where its planted. I'm hopeful the day will come when will have just as many missionaries serving in the US from foreign lands as vice versa. Also, the ward boundaries thing is a real plus. Yes, it's a pain that I have to drive 10 minutes more each way instead of going to the closest chapel, but the way the church is able to coerce such boundaries allows for strength to be even distributed and is especially beneficial to inner-city and less privileged kids. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted November 2, 2015 Author Posted November 2, 2015 Did I say it was justified? Good heavens, Scott, I'm Exhibit A in my ability to unwittingly offend some people. I'm often completely baffled when I say something I think is rather banal and uncontroversial, and someone says I'm attacking all that is good in the world. Heck, I made a silly joke over the weekend, and I was told I was playing the victim card and goading people.What I am trying to say is that there is a dynamic in these kinds of discussions that has nothing to do with who is right or wrong, who is more effective, and who is kinder and more congenial.Fair enough.
Scott Lloyd Posted November 2, 2015 Author Posted November 2, 2015 You know what I'm getting at. It would be nice if you could offer something. I think I"ve already indicated I'm not interested in this.
rockpond Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 What is anecdotal evidence? I am not following you. What does your 'it' refer to? I'll go to Wikipedia on this: Anecdotal: Opening sentence of Scott's OP. 2
Scott Lloyd Posted November 2, 2015 Author Posted November 2, 2015 I know the quote, and I'm quite confident that Kenngo was not thinking of himself as the pig.I think Kenngo has clearly explained his meaning. He does not see it worthwhile to engage in an endless back-and-forth with those who are not at all disposed to be persuaded and where the discussion is almost certain to escalate into unpleasantness. I don't blame him, frankly.
Scott Lloyd Posted November 2, 2015 Author Posted November 2, 2015 Anecdotal: Opening sentence of Scott's OP. That's not anecdotal. "Apologists drove me out of the Church" is indeed a frequent assertion. Unless you think Dehlin was prevaricating when he said so.
Appleseed Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 So, Scott Lloyd, are you saying that you have some evidence that he wasn't sincere in his belief, but that you don't want to share that evidence because it is anecdotal? Oh, and I already know what anecdotal evidence is. The wiki was unnecessary. Are you just trying to be obtuse in order to not explain yourself? Or is there some other reason?
jkwilliams Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 Give it time. To date, most all of the "strength" from the distant trees has either been brought back to Utah (1800s) or has been needed where its planted. I'm hopeful the day will come when will have just as many missionaries serving in the US from foreign lands as vice versa. Also, the ward boundaries thing is a real plus. Yes, it's a pain that I have to drive 10 minutes more each way instead of going to the closest chapel, but the way the church is able to coerce such boundaries allows for strength to be even distributed and is especially beneficial to inner-city and less privileged kids. I guess I consider that kind of stuff to be positive effects of the church, of which there are many, but I don't know that they have much to do with the church's truth-claims. My manager at the Church Office Building once told me that he was unconcerned with the truthfulness of the church's foundational claims (Book of Mormon, First Vision, priesthood authority) but rather on the net positive the church is in his life. I thought that was fair enough, but not good enough for me. There are a lot of things that have positive effects in my life, but that doesn't necessarily mean they come from God.
Scott Lloyd Posted November 2, 2015 Author Posted November 2, 2015 So, Scott Lloyd, are you saying that you have some evidence that he wasn't sincere in his belief, but that you don't want to share that evidence because it is anecdotal? No, I meant there are countless examples of those who are sincere in their belief who are not swayed by inconclusive information they see/hear on the Internet or elsewhere. Oh, and I already know what anecdotal evidence is. The wiki was unnecessary. Are you just trying to be obtuse in order to not explain yourself? Or is there some other reason? Then I don't know why you posed the question, unless it was to be argumentative. I'm already bored with this conversation. Good-bye. 2
Buckeye Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 I guess I consider that kind of stuff to be positive effects of the church, of which there are many, but I don't know that they have much to do with the church's truth-claims. My manager at the Church Office Building once told me that he was unconcerned with the truthfulness of the church's foundational claims (Book of Mormon, First Vision, priesthood authority) but rather on the net positive the church is in his life. I thought that was fair enough, but not good enough for me. There are a lot of things that have positive effects in my life, but that doesn't necessarily mean they come from God. Again, very fair. If you have anything to offer, I'd be interested to know if you've found any organization/religion/etc. which has faith claims that you think stand up better to scrutiny, or which better channel guidance from God. I'm not kidding. If there really is something better out that I want to know. 1
Appleseed Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 No, I meant there are countless examples of those who are sincere in their belief who are not swayed by inconclusive information they see/hear on the Internet or elsewhere. Then I don't know why you posed the question, unless it was to be argumentative. I'm already bored with this conversation. Good-bye.LOL. And we never even said hello. I love you Scott. Don't go away mad, bro.
Buckeye Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 (edited) No, I meant there are countless examples of those who are sincere in their belief who are not swayed by inconclusive information they see/hear on the Internet or elsewhere. ... Yes, they're called Jehovah's Witnesses and Scientologists. ETA: For example, I know this former JW guy. Really nice and humble guy; not so great at basketball, though. Anyway, even though he grew up in the church he let himself start doubting one day and that's just when satan sent some mormon missionaries his way. He ended up leaving the Witnesses and took his family with him. They say he's in the LDS stake YM presidency (whatever that is) and that his family seems to be doing really well. But I'm sure that's just outside show for the world; time will show the folly of his choice to doubt. Edited November 2, 2015 by Buckeye
jkwilliams Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 Again, very fair. If you have anything to offer, I'd be interested to know if you've found any organization/religion/etc. which has faith claims that you think stand up better to scrutiny, or which better channel guidance from God. I'm not kidding. If there really is something better out that I want to know. I've looked for a religion that feels like home. Haven't found it yet, which would explain why I still go to church with my wife more often than not.
Scott Lloyd Posted November 2, 2015 Author Posted November 2, 2015 LOL. And we never even said hello. I love you Scott. Don't go away mad, bro.I'm not mad.
Thinking Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 I think Kenngo has clearly explained his meaning. He does not see it worthwhile to engage in an endless back-and-forth with those who are not at all disposed to be persuaded and where the discussion is almost certain to escalate into unpleasantness. I don't blame him, frankly. Prejudging at its best.
Scott Lloyd Posted November 2, 2015 Author Posted November 2, 2015 Prejudging at its best.Physician, heal thyself. 1
jkwilliams Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 Yes, they're called Jehovah's Witnesses and Scientologists. I guess it depends how you define "inconclusive." Most people who have left the church over such information probably feel it's pretty conclusive.
Appleseed Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 Oh, and Scott, I believe what really swayed Hans Mattson was not the Internet. It was the General Authorities who travelled to Sweden, but pretty much botched the rescue. And another Apostle promising all kinds of information that was never delivered probably didn't help. I would ask you if you actually ever listened to his interviews in various places around the internet, but I take it now that you are too bored and thus slammed the door behind you. I was just starting to enjoy our conversation, and ....poof. All the best to you anyway, Scott.
Buckeye Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 I guess it depends how you define "inconclusive." Most people who have left the church over such information probably feel it's pretty conclusive. "Inconclusive" means it doesn't match with what I believe.
jkwilliams Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 "Inconclusive" means it doesn't match with what I believe. I'd say it's more that it's not enough to make me question what I believe or know.
Scott Lloyd Posted November 2, 2015 Author Posted November 2, 2015 "Inconclusive" means it doesn't match with what I believe.From dictionary.com: not conclusive; not resolving fully all doubts or questions:
Scott Lloyd Posted November 2, 2015 Author Posted November 2, 2015 I'd say it's more that it's not enough to make me question what I believe or know.Well, you're a lot closer to the mark than Buckeye was. See the definition I posted from dictionary.com
jkwilliams Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 Well, you're a lot closer to the mark than Buckeye was. See the definition I posted from dictionary.com The point is that the definition of "inconclusive" is pretty subjective. What you find conclusive, I might find inconclusive, and vice versa. For example, Dan Peterson lists the witnesses as his first example of conclusive evidence, yet a lot of people don't find them to be conclusive at all, not even particularly compelling. Is it a matter of Dan having more of a desire to believe, or simply a matter of Dan giving different weight to witness testimony than others do? 1
cynth Posted November 2, 2015 Posted November 2, 2015 Give it time. To date, most all of the "strength" from the distant trees has either been brought back to Utah (1800s) or has been needed where its planted. I'm hopeful the day will come when will have just as many missionaries serving in the US from foreign lands as vice versa. Also, the ward boundaries thing is a real plus. Yes, it's a pain that I have to drive 10 minutes more each way instead of going to the closest chapel, but the way the church is able to coerce such boundaries allows for strength to be even distributed and is especially beneficial to inner-city and less privileged kids.Your comment about ward boundaries being beneficial to inner-city, less-privileged kids is interesting, and certainly a worthy goal, but I only know of the case in my state where an deeply disadvantaged inner-city area with relatively to extremely socio-economically privileged cities all around it (Eastern Seaboard) has ward and stake boundaries that completely surround it and separate it out, assigning it to the mission area with which it has no contingent borders. I have often thought that was unfortunate, that the goal of benefiting less privileged kids would be better met if their area were included in one of the surrounding areas, even if it was just being a separate ward in the surrounding stake. I certainly don't know enough to know why the borders are as they are, but it would be interesting to hear your take on what might be happening there. My (relatively uneducated) guess was that it may have something to do with the pool of available priesthood holders, but again, I would be interested if you have any other insight or observations to add.
Recommended Posts