"Major Problems with Mormonism"

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, CountryBoy said:

That is what i expected

Silly responses deserve another silly response.  

[Teancum]

2 hours ago, CountryBoy said:

Ah....so you need to claim the same things since both love and God are stupid hoaxes?  Interesting

Maybe I am slow but your comment does not seem to follow the crux of my question.  

[James Tunney]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

And what exactly does NOT come from your brain that you know?

If it's NOT in your brain how do you know it?

The entire point Hoffman was making, and nearly all philosophers today as postmodernists, to put it in terms you will understand, is that all reality as you see it comes from your own brain, and cannot be separated from emotion.  

Reality itself is mixed with emotion as made clear in your own  emotional need to separate yourself from emotion.  You will not even see what is obvious.

Perhaps it is linked to your need to boast about how much money you have, and how stupid we are.

The belief that love, like God, and moral rules, which are all similar, are irrational because they are not scientific, serves perhaps for you, an emotional need,  and so you subscribe to the false idea that emotion and reason can be separated. For some reason you seem to want to believe that only science can explore reality.

Just watch the Nightly News and you will know there is no such thing as an objective opinion. Understand clearly the politics of scientific funding and you will know there is no such thing as an objective scientific experiment. Understand the Copenhagen interpretation and you will understand that there is no such thing as an objective observation. Understand Hoffman and the philosophers, and you will understand that there is no such thing as objective reality.

Now I am sure you will say something about driving over a cliff prove objective reality or some such nonsense.

All it proves is that you will have a subjective experience of driving over a cliff  and I still will have no idea what your subjective and therefore non scientific experience was.

I may also see the cliff but have enough emotional intelligence not to drive over it.

The existence of a cliff has nothing to do with our emotional understanding of what it is subjectively. If one has a subjective emotional need to commit suicide perhaps the cliff will be attractive.

Another comment I often get is yes but you still can't walk through walls. Of course this is true but that misses the point completely. The fact that I perceived the wall as a wall and do not even try to walk through it shows that there are as rorty's says in the quote in my signature that there are causes independent of the human mind. How we perceive those causes however is always up to the human mind and that always includes emotion.

If there's no such thing as objective reality, then why push your subjective church reality on others? What gives you or your church the right to do so?

[Atheist Mormon]

10 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

There you go again- the unforgivable sin- giving away Earnings to something YOU do not understand.

Earnings, the only One True God.

And you believe in invisible love and moral feelings as a real force in your life, the existence of which cannot be seen or measured.  Money gives you Peace, when it can be here today and gone tomorrow.

 Inconsistent and kind of sad really

Never been more consistent, ever since I let that invisible, protecting "Sky Daddy" illusion go.....Now there's only me, and some friends/partners I can rely on. I don't have to pray for anything to fall on my lap.....Just to give you an absurd example of meaningless prayer......; I see these players, unashamedly open their hands and pray... He prays for his win and opponents losing, just like in OT God promising Abraham & his family  Canaan....Hey Mr. God the land of Canaan is already occupied by people who tries to eke out a living....What did we do to draw your ire? (But of course it wasn't God, it was just Hebrews fertile imagination).

[mfbukowski]

10 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Never been more consistent, ever since I let that invisible, protecting "Sky Daddy" illusion go.....Now there's only me, and some friends/partners I can rely on. I don't have to pray for anything to fall on my lap.....Just to give you an absurd example of meaningless prayer......; I see these players, unashamedly open their hands and pray... He prays for his win and opponents losing, just like in OT God promising Abraham & his family  Canaan....Hey Mr. God the land of Canaan is already occupied by people who tries to eke out a living....What did we do to draw your ire? (But of course it wasn't God, it was just Hebrews fertile imagination).

So you have no answer, just more rage, blind rage against God without the ability to reason or even see anything else.

I am sorry, I don't know how to help you. I tried.

 

[mfbukowski]

8 hours ago, James Tunney said:

If there's no such thing as objective reality, then why push your subjective church reality on others? What gives you or your church the right to do so?

I think you missed the point. All anyone has is the shared intersubjective reality we agree on in a community,  Language links us all.

Just as everyone including you share their community's subjective reality, so do we.

Quote

 

In the debate between cognitive individualism and cognitive universalism, some aspects of thinking are neither solely personal nor fully universal. Cognitive sociology proponents argue for intersubjectivity—an intermediate perspective of social cognition that provides a balanced view between personal and universal views of our social cognition. This approach suggests that, instead of being individual or universal thinkers, human beings subscribe to "thought communities"—communities of differing beliefs. Thought community examples include churches, professions, scientific beliefs, generations, nations, and political movements.[11] This perspective explains why each individual thinks differently from each another (individualism): person A may choose to adhere to expiry dates on foods, but person B may believe that expiry dates are only guidelines and it is still safe to eat the food days past the expiry date. But not all human beings think the same way (universalism).

Intersubjectivity argues that each thought community shares social experiences that are different from the social experiences of other thought communities, creating differing beliefs among people who subscribe to different thought communities. These experiences transcend our subjectivity, which explains why they can be shared by the entire thought community.[12]Proponents of intersubjectivity support the view that individual beliefs are often the result of thought community beliefs, not just personal experiences or universal and objective human beliefs. Beliefs are recast in terms of standards, which are set by thought communities.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity

Edited June 20, 2016 by mfbukowski

[James Tunney]

1 minute ago, mfbukowski said:

I think you missed the point. All anyone has is the shared intersubjective reality we agree on in a community,  Language links us all.

Just as everyone including you share their community's subjective reality, so do we.

Isn't that another way of saying that there is an objective reality we describe to each other through language? If we all perceive it, and agree that is what we collectively perceive, then why isn't that a shared objective reality?

[Atheist Mormon]

52 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

So you have no answer, just more rage, blind rage against God without the ability to reason or even see anything else.

I am sorry, I don't know how to help you. I tried.

 

I afraid you are confusing the rage part with reality......

[Gray]

1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Never been more consistent, ever since I let that invisible, protecting "Sky Daddy" illusion go.....Now there's only me, and some friends/partners I can rely on. I don't have to pray for anything to fall on my lap.....Just to give you an absurd example of meaningless prayer......; I see these players, unashamedly open their hands and pray... He prays for his win and opponents losing, just like in OT God promising Abraham & his family  Canaan....Hey Mr. God the land of Canaan is already occupied by people who tries to eke out a living....What did we do to draw your ire? (But of course it wasn't God, it was just Hebrews fertile imagination).

Modern atheism is a reaction against naive fundamentalism. As long as that continues to be the case, atheism itself continues to sound a bit naive. 

Why not explore more sophisticated theological notions than just the simplistic fundamentalism you were raised with? You might find that the "I don't need no sky daddy" rhetoric will eventually ring hollow to you. 

[thesometimesaint]

17 hours ago, CountryBoy said:

If you do not believe in love....how do you get by?  

I believe in love.

[thesometimesaint]

14 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Not even close.....Did you read what I wrote? Love is an emotion people can experience....When you explain God along the same way, it might work for you but it never worked for me because I do find the premise misleading... As for you defending the indefensible, "The Jews killed were on humans, not God." here we have perfect opportunity for God to save his people, and what you say..."People killed them not God...." you & I agree on this because he never existed, otherwise He would raise his hand to protect his people as he did in ancient times. 

One more thing about love, it comes from your own brain, like it did my own...it is a biological emotion....so is belief in God, even though it is a very misleading notion it helps humans to to survive....

As God is the only one who can give someone back their life. He should be the only one to take it.

[thesometimesaint]

1 hour ago, James Tunney said:

Isn't that another way of saying that there is an objective reality we describe to each other through language? If we all perceive it, and agree that is what we collectively perceive, then why isn't that a shared objective reality?

Because that make reality a democracy which it clearly isn't

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, James Tunney said:

Isn't that another way of saying that there is an objective reality we describe to each other through language? If we all perceive it, and agree that is what we collectively perceive, then why isn't that a shared objective reality?

No

Reality is in your mind, it cannot be elsewhere.  How do you get outside your observations to make sure they are correct?  How can you take off the "rose colored glasses" to compare what you see to what you would see without human perception?

You cannot.

Did you see the Hoffman article/video above?  It is flawed, no question but it has to be to teach what it teaches.  Go to the link, page down til you find the video.  Start with the video first, it is only a few minutes.  Then read the article.   Also read the article on intersubjectivity, which runs throughout the sciences and philosophy and is virtually universal in all contemporary literature.

This IS the central view of academicians today- of course there are some exceptions.  But THIS WILL be the basis of Mormon theology in the future- it already is really for those who actually read Mormon theology today.  It is the basis for such writers as James Faulconer, Adam Miller, Blake Ostler and many writing today.

Hoffman:

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/04/the-illusion-of-reality/479559/

If you do nothing else, watch the Hoffman video- go to the article, page down til you find the video and watch it- it is only a few minutes long.  But then you will have questions.

Read that article and then this one on Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity

 

[mfbukowski]

17 hours ago, Teancum said:

The evidence of love is seen by how we behave.

Yep that's the point!

Alma 32 says religious knowledge is measured the same way.  That is the whole point of "Orthopraxis" over Orthodoxy. Faith is a principle of action- and Mormonism is a lifestyle as much as it is a belief system.  But they go hand in hand.  The sweet lifestyle cannot be separated from the belief system.

The sweet lifestyle is a bi-product of the belief and is its pragmatic "proof".

THAT is straight Alma 32.  But mimicking the life style without the beliefs will not work.  The sweet lifestyle PROVES the beliefs, not the other way around.

So to sum up:

Belief in God and the rest of Mormonism,  like love, is proven by behavior and emotion.  You get a little of it and it is sweet, and you want more.  You believe more/love more and it grows and grows into knowledge- and in the love sense yes, you can use that word Biblically.   Yada.  Look it up. http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/bakers-evangelical-dictionary/know-knowledge.html

The analogy is a perfect one.  

And the use of these words in this manner is perfectly rational and to the point as shown by contemporary philosophers today.  One cannot separate the intellect from the emotions and reality itself is intersubjective.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersubjectivity

Quote

 

Contemporarily, intersubjectivity is a major topic in both the analytic and the continental traditions of philosophy. Intersubjectivity is considered crucial not only at the relational level but also at the epistemological and even metaphysical levels. For example, intersubjectivity is postulated as playing a role in establishing the truth of propositions, and constituting the so-called objectivity of objects.

A central concern in consciousness studies of the past 50 years is the so-called problem of other minds, which asks how we can justify our belief that people have minds much like our own and predict others' mind-states and behavior, as our experience shows we often can.[10] Contemporary philosophical theories of intersubjectivity need to address the problem of other minds.

In the debate between cognitive individualism and cognitive universalism, some aspects of thinking are neither solely personal nor fully universal. Cognitive sociology proponents argue for intersubjectivity—an intermediate perspective of social cognition that provides a balanced view between personal and universal views of our social cognition. This approach suggests that, instead of being individual or universal thinkers, human beings subscribe to "thought communities"—communities of differing beliefs. Thought community examples include churches, professions, scientific beliefs, generations, nations, and political movements.[11] This perspective explains why each individual thinks differently from each another (individualism): person A may choose to adhere to expiry dates on foods, but person B may believe that expiry dates are only guidelines and it is still safe to eat the food days past the expiry date. But not all human beings think the same way (universalism).

Intersubjectivity argues that each thought community shares social experiences that are different from the social experiences of other thought communities, creating differing beliefs among people who subscribe to different thought communities. These experiences transcend our subjectivity, which explains why they can be shared by the entire thought community.[12] Proponents of intersubjectivity support the view that individual beliefs are often the result of thought community beliefs, not just personal experiences or universal and objective human beliefs. Beliefs are recast in terms of standards, which are set by thought communities.

 

Note also my siggys

[mfbukowski]

5 hours ago, James Tunney said:

Isn't that another way of saying that there is an objective reality we describe to each other through language? If we all perceive it, and agree that is what we collectively perceive, then why isn't that a shared objective reality?

I just realized there is another way to answer your question, but it all depends on semantics

If you want to CALL "objective reality" everything in your mind put there by society and your senses and prejudices and your beliefs, then OK but then that just says that objective reality is different for everyone

That sounds a little weird.

That is the problem I have with Hoffman- he STILL speaks of "reality" as if it is still out there but we cannot perceive it.  Rorty gets beyond that and says there is no sense in postulating the existence of something we cannot know about, thus my siggy

" To say that the world is out there, that it is not our creation, is to say, with common sense, that most things in space and time are the effects of causes which do not include human mental states.  To say that truth is not out there is simply to say that where there are no sentences, there is no truth, that sentences are elements of human languages, and that human languages are human creations.

     Truth cannot be out there- cannot exist independently of the human mind- because sentences cannot so exist, or be out there.  The world is out there, but descriptions of the world are not.  Only descriptions of the world can be true or false.  The world on its own- unaided by the describing activities of human beings- cannot."   Richard Rorty- Contingency Irony and Solidarity, P 5.

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, Gray said:

Modern atheism is a reaction against naive fundamentalism. As long as that continues to be the case, atheism itself continues to sound a bit naive. 

Why not explore more sophisticated theological notions than just the simplistic fundamentalism you were raised with? You might find that the "I don't need no sky daddy" rhetoric will eventually ring hollow to you. 

I wish I could say it that nicely.

[UtahTexan]

18 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Yes we are accidents of supernovas....how funny...Total accident....The sad thing is you pay an allegiance to an invisible god....worse you pay part of your earning to someone who enjoys......

Ah...you compare a supernova to the miracle that is a human being?  How typical!  And so sad in your world that love does not exist.  How sad for your family that you can't accept love.

[UtahTexan]

5 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

I believe in love.

Do you?  So you agree God exists?

[UtahTexan]

17 hours ago, Teancum said:

Maybe I am slow but your comment does not seem to follow the crux of my question.  

We can agree regarding your speed.  My take is simply that since God and love are hoaxes, how do you go day to day?

[UtahTexan]

17 hours ago, Teancum said:

Silly responses deserve another silly response.  

That is your best comeback to the fact you are predictable?

[Atheist Mormon]

3 hours ago, CountryBoy said:

Ah...you compare a supernova to the miracle that is a human being?  How typical!  And so sad in your world that love does not exist.  How sad for your family that you can't accept love.

Have dare you compare the miracle of supernova to a lowly Primate? What did humanity accomplish other stars know about? I have plenty love in me, I raised kids, I have a loving family...Is ad hominem your modus operandi? I'm sorry when I look humanity I don't see anything special, OTOH when I see a Gorilla my heart fills with emphaty & compassion....We need to protect them.... 

The difference is we humans  got some serious breaks in evolutionary process; it wasn't an overnight creation as your scriptures mislead you, in fact it was such an arduous process we went back & forth between primates before deciding to walk bipedally....

Yes I'm very lucky to be born as a human but that's it.... 

[UtahTexan]

3 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Have dare you compare the miracle of supernova to a lowly Primate? What did humanity accomplish other stars know about? I have plenty love in me, I raised kids, I have a loving family...Is ad hominem your modus operandi? I'm sorry when I look humanity I don't see anything special, OTOH when I see a Gorilla my heart fills with emphaty & compassion....We need to protect them.... 

The difference is we humans  got some serious breaks in evolutionary process; it wasn't an overnight creation as your scriptures mislead you, in fact it was such an arduous process we went back & forth between primates before deciding to walk bipedally....

Yes I'm very lucky to be born as a human but that's it.... 

Perhaps your ancestors were lowly primates...would explain a lot.  But, a body that has eyes better than the best cameras, ears better than the best audio equipment, a brain better than the best computer....yeah....it is far less likely it was accidental then there is a God.  But...in your world...must be horrible for your family that you do not believe in love.  Your admission was priceless.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said:

 I'm sorry when I look humanity I don't see anything special, OTOH when I see a Gorilla my heart fills with emphaty & compassion...

Utterly ridiculous.
And very, very sad.

[Atheist Mormon]

59 minutes ago, CountryBoy said:

"Perhaps your ancestors were lowly primates...would explain a lot. " Well, that is a leap of 3.5 Billion years, before everything else there were lowly prokaryotes...But it is an honor to share my ancestry with chimps/gorillas. You do not think we evolved?

"But, a body that has eyes better than the best cameras, ears better than the best audio equipment, a brain better than the best computer....yeah....it is far less likely it was accidental then there is a God.  But...in your world...must be horrible for your family that you do not believe in love.  Your admission was priceless. "

Well, again...you are embarrassing yourself by not studying the evolutionary path the eyes took, it shows layer by layer how it gained those compound perfection, it is like a college textbook  precission....or you think so?

And what was my admission of such priceless value? 

 

[UtahTexan]

20 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

"Perhaps your ancestors were lowly primates...would explain a lot. " Well, that is a leap of 3.5 Billion years, before everything else there were lowly prokaryotes...But it is an honor to share my ancestry with chimps/gorillas. You do not think we evolved?

Nope...I do not think you evolved at all.  You are related to apes and do not believe in love.

20 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

"But, a body that has eyes better than the best cameras, ears better than the best audio equipment, a brain better than the best computer....yeah....it is far less likely it was accidental then there is a God.  But...in your world...must be horrible for your family that you do not believe in love.  Your admission was priceless. "

Well, again...you are embarrassing yourself by not studying the evolutionary path the eyes took, it shows layer by layer how it gained those compound perfection, it is like a college textbook  precission....or you think so?

Actually, it doesn't.  I am sure you believe it does....but then, you do not believe in love...so why should I listen?  Your layer by layer is not only silly but unproven.....wait...you do ot believe in the unproven, so even you do not believe in  your silly theory

20 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

And what was my admission of such priceless value? 

An evolved mind would know