The Defining Human Characteristic

[Analytics]

Lee Child begins the book Jack Reacher’s Rules with the following observation:

 

 

Quote

If you’ve been paying attention long enough, you know one thing for sure: the defining human characteristic is tribalism.  We all slice and dice the world’s population into ever smaller fragments until we find a group where we feel comfortable, where we feel we truly belong.

And having arrived there, we make rules governing that group’s behavior.  We want a reliable guide to how to act, we want to build bulwarks against outsiders, we want to provide a secure mechanism for belonging, we want to reassure ourselves that continuing membership is guaranteed if only we conform.

 

 It seems there is an unprecedented amount of stress on what delineates being a member of Mormon tribe.  Just 10 years ago, it seemed everybody accepted what distinguished members of the group from non-members.  Back then, it seemed that everybody accepted that if you confirmed you were in, and that if you didn’t you were out.  Not everybody liked it, but people generally accepted it.  Sure, the Sunstone crowd didn't like, say, Michael Quinn being excommunicated, but there was very little sympathy or controversy about it in the general church.  Not anymore.   

 

Now the big issues being discussed tend to be about people disagreeing with how the tribe is defined.  Should Members of the gay-lesbian movement be in or out? Members of the feminist movement? So-called scholars and intellectuals? John Dehlin?  Transgenders?  The loyal opposition?  People that make a single post on Facebook expressing disbelief?  The children of people in same-sex marriages? Consigliere?

 

Is a fundamental shift happening, or is an increased tension between members’ consciences and the dear old doctrines of the church the new norm?  Is the information age causing the tares to be separated from the wheat?

Edited April 6, 2016 by Analytics

[thesometimesaint]

At some point all of us have to decide what it is we truly believe. If that involves leaving our comfortable tribe for another then stay true to what you truly believe.

[cdowis]

I am a simple man.  If the church has your membership record, you are an innie.  If not, then you are outie.

[Russell C McGregor]

9 hours ago, Analytics said:

Lee Child begins the book Jack Reacher’s Rules with the following observation:

 

 

 

 It seems there is an unprecedented amount of stress on what delineates being a member of Mormon tribe.  Just 10 years ago, it seemed everybody accepted what distinguished members of the group from non-members.  Back then, it seemed that everybody accepted that if you confirmed you were in, and that if you didn’t you were out.  Not everybody liked it, but people generally accepted it.  Sure, the Sunstone crowd didn't like, say, Michael Quinn being excommunicated, but there was very little sympathy or controversy about it in the general church.  Not anymore.   

Really?

Who's actually worried about The Mighty Quinn's membership?

9 hours ago, Analytics said:

Now the big issues being discussed tend to be about people disagreeing with how the tribe is defined.  Should Members of the gay-lesbian movement be in or out? Members of the feminist movement? So-called scholars and intellectuals?

I don't know anyone who disagrees that we extend the invitation to all who are willing to repent, be baptized, and make an effort to live up to their baptismal covenants. Do you?

9 hours ago, Analytics said:

John Dehlin?

No controversy there: he's out, and only his sympathisers have complained.

9 hours ago, Analytics said:

Transgenders?  The loyal opposition?

What "loyal opposition" is that?

9 hours ago, Analytics said:

People that make a single post on Facebook expressing disbelief?

That's a predictable spin on the case in question.

9 hours ago, Analytics said:

The children of people in same-sex marriages?

You mean minor children whose primary home is in a same-sex household?

9 hours ago, Analytics said:

Consigliere?

That's between him and his bishop.

9 hours ago, Analytics said:

Is a fundamental shift happening, or is an increased tension between members’ consciences and the dear old doctrines of the church the new norm?

 

Or is this a storm in an egg cup?

9 hours ago, Analytics said:

Is the information age causing the tares to be separated from the wheat?

Or is the "information age" somewhat overrated?

Should it be called the "sound bite age?"

 

[Meadowchik]

If you listen, you'll notice that since Christ and up to including this Conference we've been taught to blur those lines, to not confine social circles to any tribe.

Some want to change the boundaries of the Church "tribe" but we are being taught to not see the church membership boundaries as the definition of our tribe.

In essence, we are to redefine the human characteristic, be new, be more.

[Ahab]

Darn. I thought you might correctly identify our main differentiating characteristic as our particular degree or order of intelligence.

Lots of other creatures separate themselves into tribes.  

[HappyJackWagon]

On ‎4‎/‎6‎/‎2016 at 1:01 PM, Analytics said:

Lee Child begins the book Jack Reacher’s Rules with the following observation:

 

 

 

 It seems there is an unprecedented amount of stress on what delineates being a member of Mormon tribe.  Just 10 years ago, it seemed everybody accepted what distinguished members of the group from non-members.  Back then, it seemed that everybody accepted that if you confirmed you were in, and that if you didn’t you were out.  Not everybody liked it, but people generally accepted it.  Sure, the Sunstone crowd didn't like, say, Michael Quinn being excommunicated, but there was very little sympathy or controversy about it in the general church.  Not anymore.   

 

Now the big issues being discussed tend to be about people disagreeing with how the tribe is defined.  Should Members of the gay-lesbian movement be in or out? Members of the feminist movement? So-called scholars and intellectuals? John Dehlin?  Transgenders?  The loyal opposition?  People that make a single post on Facebook expressing disbelief?  The children of people in same-sex marriages? Consigliere?

 

Is a fundamental shift happening, or is an increased tension between members’ consciences and the dear old doctrines of the church the new norm?  Is the information age causing the tares to be separated from the wheat?

I think there's really something there to think about.

Tribalism seems to be a mixture of the natural tendency towards pride and the human need for security.

[Jeanne]

5 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I think there's really something there to think about.

Tribalism seems to be a mixture of the natural tendency towards pride and the human need for security.

I agree.  Belonging and the need for security is sometimes the only thing that keeps one a member of the tribe.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Ahab said:

Darn. I thought you might correctly identify our main differentiating characteristic as our particular degree or order of intelligence.

Lots of other creatures separate themselves into tribes.  

Yeah, the Savior and other prophets have all had great success amongst the learned and clever.

[Ahab]

30 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yeah, the Savior and other prophets have all had great success amongst the learned and clever.

Perhaps being in the most intelligent tribe doesn't help much???

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Ahab said:

Perhaps being in the most intelligent tribe doesn't help much???

My tribe can beat up your tribe.

[Ahab]

48 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

My tribe can beat up your tribe.

What are you talking about?

We are in the same tribe!

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Ahab said:

What are you talking about?

We are in the same tribe!

You are tribe of Naphtali too?

[pogi]

 

On April 6, 2016 at 0:01 PM, Analytics said:

Now the big issues being discussed tend to be about people disagreeing with how the tribe is defined.

Well, it is not up to the people.  The grounds are clearly defined for both membership and excommunication - there doesn't seem to be any controversy among the prophets about expanding or shrinking those boundaries.  

It is up to the judges in Israel to interpret and enforce those boundaries.  If someone has been confirmed and has not been excommunicated, they are still a member.  That is the rules of the tribe. 

P.S.  There is nothing wrong with tribalism.  It seems to be the universal and eternal order of things.  It is by no means the "defining" human characteristic, as it does not distinguish us from the rest of nature.  Anywhere you find rules, laws, or expectations, even down to the family level, there are tribes.  Absolute anarchy (not just politically speaking) is the only alternative. 

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, pogi said:

 

Well, it is not up to the people.  The grounds are clearly defined for both membership and excommunication - there doesn't seem to be any controversy among the prophets about expanding or shrinking those boundaries.  

It is up to the judges in Israel to interpret and enforce those boundaries.  If someone has been confirmed and has not been excommunicated, they are still a member.  That is the rules of the tribe. 

P.S.  There is nothing wrong with tribalism.  It seems to be the universal and eternal order of things.  It is by no means the "defining" human characteristic, as it does not distinguish us from the rest of nature.  Anywhere you find rules, laws, or expectations, even down to the family level, there are tribes.  Absolute anarchy (not just politically speaking) is the only alternative. 

So, if I get the gist of your message, we're all in one big giant all-inclusive tribe that includes everybody who is the same kind of being we are... people, in general... and from that one big giant all-inclusive tribe we separate ourselves into smaller tribes...sub-tribes, so to speak. 

And the reason we can't all just get along is because some of our sub-tribes have some rules or codes of conduct that clash with the rules or codes of conduct of other sub-tribes. 

Hatfields vs McCoys shooting at or otherwise trying to kill each other just because that's what Hatfields and McCoys are supposed to do, for example.

So clashing rules and codes of conduct are to blame, huh.  Or the determination to keep the same rules and codes of conduct.  We can never change those, otherwise an entire sub-tribe civilization would be lost!

[pogi]

17 minutes ago, Ahab said:

So, if I get the gist of your message, we're all in one big giant all-inclusive tribe that includes everybody who is the same kind of being we are... people, in general... and from that one big giant all-inclusive tribe we separate ourselves into smaller tribes...sub-tribes, so to speak. 

That is how it works, yes.

17 minutes ago, Ahab said:

And the reason we can't all just get along is because some of our sub-tribes have some rules or codes of conduct that clash with the rules or codes of conduct of other sub-tribes. 

That, and Satan has something to do with it.

18 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Hatfields vs McCoys shooting at or otherwise trying to kill each other just because that's what Hatfields and McCoys are supposed to do, for example.

I never said all tribes are righteous.

19 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Or the determination to keep the same rules and codes of conduct.  We can never change those, otherwise an entire sub-tribe civilization would be lost!

I don't know what you are talking about here, or what this has to do with what I said. 

[carbon dioxide]

Human beings tend to want to be part of a group that they can identify with and who those in the tribe can identify with them.  We don't want to be part of groups who members don't like, understand, or care about us.  Theses are my tribes

1.  My family tribe.  I love friends and neighbors but they come and go.  The family is always there even after death.

2.  My LDS tribe.  I have a much closer relationship with those of similar faith than those who do not share my faith or may oppose my faith.  I don't hate those in other faiths but I rather hang out with LDS people than a group of atheists.

3.  My national tribe. I am an American.  I am not German or Japanese.  I will fight and die for America but not for other countries.  It is the obligation of citizens of each country to fight and die for their own countries.

4.  My political tribe.  I am basically a conservative independent who is somewhat libertarian.  I can get along with people in other groups but at the end of the day, I don't identify with a socialist liberal and they are not my first choice to be around.

When conflict in the tribe occurs, it needs to be dealt with in some manner.  The biggest enemy of any tribe is not the external enemy but the internal one.  One can always rally a tribe around the external and opposing tribe but it is the internal enemy that is in the tribe that is most dangerous.  Hence a house divided can not stand.  In regards to my LDS tribe, our enemy is not atheists or baptists, or Catholics but ourselves if we allow internal groups attempt to redefine or change the tribe fundamentally in some way that it becomes something  we would not recognize.  The Kingdom of God is not a democracy but a kingdom and change does not occur by vote or group consensus but by agreement that change comes from the King himself being Christ.  The "loyal opposition" tend to think of themselves as more important in the Kingdom of God then they actually are.  Even Joseph Smith was replaceable to God.  We need God far more than God will ever need us.  All of us can be replaced by God with someone else if we fail to do what he asks. 

[Ahab]

46 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Human beings tend to want to be part of a group that they can identify with and who those in the tribe can identify with them.  We don't want to be part of groups who members don't like, understand, or care about us.  Theses are my tribes

1.  My family tribe.  I love friends and neighbors but they come and go.  The family is always there even after death.

2.  My LDS tribe.  I have a much closer relationship with those of similar faith than those who do not share my faith or may oppose my faith.  I don't hate those in other faiths but I rather hang out with LDS people than a group of atheists.

3.  My national tribe. I am an American.  I am not German or Japanese.  I will fight and die for America but not for other countries.  It is the obligation of citizens of each country to fight and die for their own countries.

4.  My political tribe.  I am basically a conservative independent who is somewhat libertarian.  I can get along with people in other groups but at the end of the day, I don't identify with a socialist liberal and they are not my first choice to be around.

When conflict in the tribe occurs, it needs to be dealt with in some manner.  The biggest enemy of any tribe is not the external enemy but the internal one.  One can always rally a tribe around the external and opposing tribe but it is the internal enemy that is in the tribe that is most dangerous.  Hence a house divided can not stand.  In regards to my LDS tribe, our enemy is not atheists or baptists, or Catholics but ourselves if we allow internal groups attempt to redefine or change the tribe fundamentally in some way that it becomes something  we would not recognize.  The Kingdom of God is not a democracy but a kingdom and change does not occur by vote or group consensus but by agreement that change comes from the King himself being Christ.  The "loyal opposition" tend to think of themselves as more important in the Kingdom of God then they actually are.  Even Joseph Smith was replaceable to God.  We need God far more than God will ever need us.  All of us can be replaced by God with someone else if we fail to do what he asks. 

That just about covers it all, I think.

I think each tribe needs to allow for some type of adjustment period, though.  Or several adjustment periods.  Allowing some time for new members to learn how to adjust from their former tribe to the tribe they have recently joined, as well as some time to learn how to grow and advance in the new tribe.

But as Gus Portakolos said,  in the end, we are all fruit, whether apples or oranges.

So, there you go!

Now go ahead and give me any word and I will show you how the root of that word is Greek.