Elder Uchtdorf's Council to Avoid using Fear to Motivate

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, JulieM said:

I don't know about "never" or "ever".  Have you read some of the speeches Jedediah Grant gave or some of Brigham Young's given to congregations?  I've thought how people would react with terror if they heard those today!

There was considerable justification for fear during the so-called Utah War, and during the harsh Federal persecution of the Saints over polygyny. So, yes, three have been occasions for that sort of thing.  The hysteria led to the Mountain Meadows Massacre.  Such extremes are very unusual.

[cacheman]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That could work.  

Though, my husband has moved from an employee position to a self employed position in the last few years and he gets people every week who come up to him and express how much they wish they could work for themselves, so i don't know that the employed verses self employed comparison is all that equal in most people's minds.  My own husband certainly thinks that the latter is superior to the former.

It seems like (speaking only from my experience) that most people, given the choice, would rather be self employed if they had that option.

I guess this is why using analogies can be a bit of a minefield.  Everyone has their own way of seeing things.  

You're right.  There's no perfect analogy.  I went from owning a business to working for others..... and after a decade of that, I'm considering going back to being self-employed.  There are pros and cons either way. 

What I'm attempting to work around is the idea that leaving the LDS faith (or any faith) doesn't necessarily mean that life becomes easier.  When I was self-employed, I would not like someone telling me that my life is much freer and less restrictive because I lost a lot of responsibility and work..... even if I personally agreed that my life was freer and less restrictive.  The flexibility and freedom from my self-employment wasn't due to less responsibility and work.... just a different kind of work.   At the same time, the work I do now is not easier since I have someone directing what I do... it also requires a different kind of work and responsibility.

 

[bluebell]

29 minutes ago, cacheman said:

You're right.  There's no perfect analogy.  I went from owning a business to working for others..... and after a decade of that, I'm considering going back to being self-employed.  There are pros and cons either way. 

What I'm attempting to work around is the idea that leaving the LDS faith (or any faith) doesn't necessarily mean that life becomes easier.  When I was self-employed, I would not like someone telling me that my life is much freer and less restrictive because I lost a lot of responsibility and work..... even if I personally agreed that my life was freer and less restrictive.  The flexibility and freedom from my self-employment wasn't due to less responsibility and work.... just a different kind of work.   At the same time, the work I do now is not easier since I have someone directing what I do... it also requires a different kind of work and responsibility.

 

I get what you are saying.

I equated JC's own description of his life post religion, which he described as "freer" and "able to take a deep breath after a life of wearing restricted and confining clothes" as the equivalent of saying his life was easier.   To me, they are synonymous.

I get that they might not be for others though.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2017 by bluebell

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Just yesterday we had a stake leader preach the Good Ship Zion. Where will you go? What would you do? Certain death and destruction awaits anyone who gets out of the boat.

"Don't you even think about getting off this boat!" was his concluding remark.

The good ship Zion is a fear based metaphor and the talk yesterday was definitely a fear based talk. The speaker clearly hadn't received Pres. Uchtdorf's message.

I heard a rabbi preach about the Jewish people being in a wooden boat (as it were).  What to do when some fool starts chopping a hole in the bottom?  The fool's freedom to do what he wants ends at that point.  Calm discussion of an existential threat does not mean that deep fear and hysteria will result.  Mormons take that stuff in stride.

[BlueDreams]

21 minutes ago, cacheman said:

You're right.  There's no perfect analogy.  I went from owning a business to working for others..... and after a decade of that, I'm considering going back to being self-employed.  There are pros and cons either way. 

What I'm attempting to work around is the idea that leaving the LDS faith (or any faith) doesn't necessarily mean that life becomes easier.  When I was self-employed, I would not like someone telling me that my life is much freer and less restrictive because I lost a lot of responsibility and work..... even if I personally agreed that my life was freer and less restrictive.  The flexibility and freedom from my self-employment wasn't due to less responsibility and work.... just a different kind of work.   At the same time, the work I do now is not easier since I have someone directing what I do... it also requires a different kind of work and responsibility.

 

To be honest, I don't know if there is. Both ways of stating it had about the same level of assumption that one way was better than the other. At least in reading it from where I'm sitting. I agree with more BB's and miserei because of my own personal bias, but that doesn't negate that each was speaking from the preferred position in life. Somewhere even johnnie knew it could come off as offensive to believers (if not superior) sense he mentioned as much twice. I don't think anyone here naturally meant it. But we prefer what we prefer and find value in it. Some of that value can come with contrast to what we previously had as in the case of johnnie and miserei. Some, by honest projections to what would be out and freer, as BB did.

But good luck trying to find the perfect analogy! Maybe it would be like all the times a meat eater is trying to convince me that life is soooo much better with meat. And I'm like...yeah, no, that crap gives me stomach cramps every time I go to digest it.  

 

With luv,

BD

Edited April 24, 2017 by BlueDreams

[JulieM]

29 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

There was considerable justification for fear during the so-called Utah War, and during the harsh Federal persecution of the Saints over polygyny.

Well, I was referring to their speeches given to the saints on blood atonement, etc., not speeches regarding needing to fear the federal government.

But, I don't want to derail the thread (just wanted to clarify).

Edited April 24, 2017 by JulieM

[cacheman]

9 minutes ago, BlueDreams said:

To be honest, I don't know if there is. Both ways of stating it had about the same level of assumption that one way was better than the other. At least in reading it from where I'm sitting. I agree with more BB's and miserei because of my own personal bias, but that doesn't negate that each was speaking from the preferred position in life. Somewhere even johnnie knew it could come off as offensive to believers (if not superior) sense he mentioned as much twice. I don't think anyone here naturally meant it. But we prefer what we prefer and find value in it. Some of that value can come with contrast to what we previously had as in the case of johnnie and miserei some, by honest projections to what would be out and freer, as BB did.

But good luck trying to find the perfect analogy! Maybe it would be like all the times a meat eater is trying to convince me that life is soooo much better with meat. And I'm like...yeah, no, that crap gives me stomach cramps every time I go to digest it.  

 

With luv,

BD

 

I think my analogy can work despite one's personal preferences.  I imagine most of us prefer our way of thinking or believing, and most of us feel that our way is the 'right' way.  That's normal.  My post was simply trying to find a nicer way of comparing those in and out of the LDS church.  Comparing the two as the difference between school and summer vacation carries certain implications.  The same occurs when a former believer states that believers have it easy because they're followers and don't have to think for themselves.  Either description leaves out a lot and casts negative aspersions to the other.

To be clear, this was simply a response to bluebells posts and not a defense of johnnie.  I haven't been following this thread until now, so I don't know if there are things I've missed.  I know that johnnie can be a provocateur on occasion!

PS. I'm right with you on your last statement!

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I didn't know we were enemies Nehor

The enemy of my friend is my enemy.

[rockpond]

19 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

The enemy of my friend is my enemy.

Has someone declared a war here on MD&D and I missed it?

[The Nehor]

36 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Has someone declared a war here on MD&D and I missed it?

I prefer to think of it as a UN Peacekeeping mission and not a declared war.  

[rockpond]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I prefer to think of it as a UN Peacekeeping mission and not a declared war.  

I haven't seen much peace on these threads over the past few days.  Declaring "enemies" doesn't seem like it will help.

[BlueDreams]

1 hour ago, cacheman said:

I think my analogy can work despite one's personal preferences.  I imagine most of us prefer our way of thinking or believing, and most of us feel that our way is the 'right' way.  That's normal.  My post was simply trying to find a nicer way of comparing those in and out of the LDS church.  Comparing the two as the difference between school and summer vacation carries certain implications.  The same occurs when a former believer states that believers have it easy because they're followers and don't have to think for themselves.  Either description leaves out a lot and casts negative aspersions to the other.

To be clear, this was simply a response to bluebells posts and not a defense of johnnie.  I haven't been following this thread until now, so I don't know if there are things I've missed.  I know that johnnie can be a provocateur on occasion!

PS. I'm right with you on your last statement!

I agree. I think there's an equally irritating response in pontificating about how much more freeing it is to be outside of religious constructs. That goes for me in the same boat as non-believers telling believers they have it easy/have to think for themselves, for me. Just in a different thread. Which is why I found it odd that Johnnie got offended, considering he was singing the same tune just on a different chord. If BB's and MN's line was offensive, so was his.

Here is his exact line, in case you missed it:

Quote

It's amazing how free the human mind is when one rids him or herself from the confines of religious dogma.  While I don't expect believers to share my perspective I did feel that it was important to at least state this reality. Its hard I know for believers to understand just how amazingly free life is outside of religion

I have a hard time seeing a substantial difference.

 

But I do appreciate your thoughts. I also don't think it's necessarily fair to cast unnecessary assumptions about one POV or another. 

 

With luv,

BD

Edited April 24, 2017 by BlueDreams

[Storm Rider]

3 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Yeah I tend to wear protective armor when on this board...guilty as charged.  I come at my posts on MD&D honestly and sincerely...but am often referred to as a troll or worse...even in this very thread.

Johnnie, it is pretty evident that you don't see yourself well; however, that is not a unique problem and all humans suffer from it to one degree or another. I referred to you as a troll because you like to stir things up; you seem to enjoy being offensive at times, condescending at other times, and smug at other times.  I have also read your comments when you are sincere and honest.  Most of all you are just human....one that can be a pain the backside, but human none the less.

[Johnnie Cake]

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

There was considerable justification for fear during the so-called Utah War, and during the harsh Federal persecution of the Saints over polygyny. So, yes, three have been occasions for that sort of thing.  The hysteria led to the Mountain Meadows Massacre.  Such extremes are very unusual.

Well we're making progress Robert, We've gone from "Unaware" to "Very Unusual"  that's real progress...

[Johnnie Cake]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The enemy of my friend is my enemy.

geeze

[HappyJackWagon]

35 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Johnnie, it is pretty evident that you don't see yourself well; however, that is not a unique problem and all humans suffer from it to one degree or another. I referred to you as a troll because you like to stir things up; you seem to enjoy being offensive at times, condescending at other times, and smug at other times.  I have also read your comments when you are sincere and honest.  Most of all you are just human....one that can be a pain the backside, but human none the less.

Do you think you're innocent of stirring things up because you "only" referred to him as a troll? Wouldn't that necessarily make you a troll? Maybe we can all get away from name calling. I've done it so I'm talking about myself as well,

Calling someone a "troll" is derisive and offensive and seems designed for picking a fight.

[Johnnie Cake]

57 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Johnnie, it is pretty evident that you don't see yourself well; however, that is not a unique problem and all humans suffer from it to one degree or another. I referred to you as a troll because you like to stir things up; you seem to enjoy being offensive at times, condescending at other times, and smug at other times.  I have also read your comments when you are sincere and honest.  Most of all you are just human....one that can be a pain the backside, but human none the less.

While I appreciate the criticism and your perspective on my posting activity...should I give you the benefit of doubt that you were merely being constructive when you use charged words like Troll?  How exactly should I interpret it?  As to your charge that I like to stir things up or enjoy being offended and am condescending and smug...I have no doubt that like everyone else here I am not perfect and can slip into moments of condescension although that is never my intent. When attacked I tend to defend myself.  I can also sincerely say that it is not my intent to stir things up although I do enjoy a lively debate and discussion but when doing so expect to be held accountable.  But I earnestly try to be respectful, sensitive to contrasting POV and yes even empathetic.  That you see me as smug, condescending and offensive is disconcerting...I come at my posts honestly, sincerely and in the hope of fair and honest discussion.  I guess I can't please everyone.

Edit to add: Read everything I've ever posted at MD&D.  If you can find a personal attack by me towards another poster I would be surprised...I try to stick with the topic of discussion rather than resorting to personal attacks. 

 

Edited April 24, 2017 by Johnnie Cake

[The Nehor]

24 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

geeze

Well, I did not want to step into your rhetorical trap so I had to make some kind of joke. Admittedly not my best and I apologize for the drop in quality.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Well we're making progress Robert, We've gone from "Unaware" to "Very Unusual"  that's real progress...

You were painting modern Mormonism with the brush of hysteria and fear-mongering, which just does not take place today.  Quite the opposite.  If you have to go back to the 19th century to find actual hysteria, that shows how much of a reach it takes.

[rockpond]

4 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Do you think you're innocent of stirring things up because you "only" referred to him as a troll? Wouldn't that necessarily make you a troll? Maybe we can all get away from name calling. I've done it so I'm talking about myself as well,

Calling someone a "troll" is derisive and offensive and seems designed for picking a fight.

I agree... Johnnie raised a valid point in his OP.  I'm not sure what's going on here but it seems that over the past week there has been a marked increase in personal attack rather than sticking to a discussion of the topic. 

[Freedom]

15 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Classic Dunning and Kruger effect...and a bit hyperbolic as well....and not very nice either...but setting that personal swipe aside...I assure you I am well aware of Mormon teachings...but certainly not ignorant of their use of fear as a motivational tactic.  This is not to say that, fear is not the only tool in the churches motivation tool bag and it does use other, more positive means to motivate its members as well.  I didn't focus on those because Fear was the central point of Elder Uchtdorfs talk which is why I also focused on fear.

You asked for evidence that the church uses fear as a tactic and I provided evidence where the church has used fear taken directly from a recent LDS lesson manual no less. 

Chill bro, I was in no means attempting to belittle or talk down at you or be condescending...I was just expressing my surprise that you were unaware of the use of fear as a tool of motivation in the church.  Heck even Elder Uchtdorf is aware of its use in the church and is calling those who employ this device to repentance.  To use your metaphor, That the church also uses honey does not erase the fact that it also uses the hammer of fear when it benefits them.

Again, the evidence is overwhelmingly against you. You provided one quote that references the last days and you decide the church uses fear. This is like saying a history manual text book is warmongering because it references the Vietnam war. Again, you are ignorant of mormon teachings. I invite you to listen to conference and to read just one teachers manual. You like to say you do not mean to talk down but you are constantly posting these ridiculous claims that set the church in a negative light, claims that are proven wrong over and over again. A lesson on the last days is not fear mongering, it is teaching an important doctrine. It is quoting scripture. If the church uses fear, than the majority of the lessons and talks should use treats. None of them do. Lessons on the last days simply present the facts, and then teach about how to have joy we should love one another. 

[rockpond]

5 hours ago, Freedom said:

Again, the evidence is overwhelmingly against you. You provided one quote that references the last days and you decide the church uses fear. This is like saying a history manual text book is warmongering because it references the Vietnam war. Again, you are ignorant of mormon teachings. I invite you to listen to conference and to read just one teachers manual. You like to say you do not mean to talk down but you are constantly posting these ridiculous claims that set the church in a negative light, claims that are proven wrong over and over again. A lesson on the last days is not fear mongering, it is teaching an important doctrine. It is quoting scripture. If the church uses fear, than the majority of the lessons and talks should use treats. None of them do. Lessons on the last days simply present the facts, and then teach about how to have joy we should love one another. 

I'm not sure how you conclude that the evidence is overwhelmingly against Johnnie.  I provided an example of fear being used by our prophet right in that very same conference.  

If the church wasn't guilty of using fear, why did an apostle need to counsel against it?

[Johnnie Cake]

9 hours ago, Freedom said:

Again, the evidence is overwhelmingly against you. You provided one quote that references the last days and you decide the church uses fear. This is like saying a history manual text book is warmongering because it references the Vietnam war. Again, you are ignorant of mormon teachings. I invite you to listen to conference and to read just one teachers manual. You like to say you do not mean to talk down but you are constantly posting these ridiculous claims that set the church in a negative light, claims that are proven wrong over and over again. A lesson on the last days is not fear mongering, it is teaching an important doctrine. It is quoting scripture. If the church uses fear, than the majority of the lessons and talks should use treats. None of them do. Lessons on the last days simply present the facts, and then teach about how to have joy we should love one another. 

You asked for an example...I provided 2.  It just so happened that one was from BY used in the 1850's and the same quote used recently in the BY lesson manual.  That this is the same quote is immaterial...its the fear that is elicited from the quote and that the church continues to use said quote to elicited fear and the manipulation that can be derived from its use that is the point. Are there other examples of the use of  institutional fear.  Yes its baked into church doctrine, its subtle and nuanced...but its there. Fear is at the core of the church in how it teaches that there are consequences of not living their commandments. Do a simple search in LDS.org on the consequences of sin...it is fear based. The whole doctrine of an evil being called Satan who's only desire is to destroy you is a fear based doctrine.  Of course, its a myth but it's still a fear based myth designed to create a bogyman who's only goal is to destroy you.  Then there's the fear of not achieving exaltation, fear of breaking the WoW, fear of not complying with cultural norms, fear of touching  ones own bits. Fear to stepping out of line, fear to be different from the rest,  Fear is part of the culture it is in the core of Mormonism. It's baked into the entire system.  It's even used in the Temple (but I won't go there). But I am reminded of a talk by Spencer Kimball warning members that God will not be Mocked.  That is using fear to warn members...fear of the wrath of a vengeful God who will not be mocked and will punish you if you do anything that displeases Him. The whole end of days prediction of the destruction of the world is using fear, that blood will run in the streets of SLC is fear based. 

Again that you are claiming ignorance of the use of institutional fear in the church is surprising to me...

 

Now to be fair, the church also uses honey to motivate members to comply as well....so it both uses a stick of fear to beat them with and the promise of honey and reward...so it does go both ways...but they're both there. Reward and punishment.

Edited April 25, 2017 by Johnnie Cake

[rchorse]

Critics of the church use fear at times, as well, to try to manipulate believers. 

Fear of being labeled a bigot or closed-minded. Fear of missing out on things. Fear of being repressed or controlled. Fear of all this being wasted effort, because it's not true anyway. Fear of societal shame and ridicule. Fear of being deceived or lied to. And in some extreme cases, fear of loss of employment or invasion of privacy. 

I'll admit that the church has sometimes used fear, but the critics also need to get off their high horses and recognize that they, as a group, have done the same. 

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, rchorse said:

Critics of the church use fear at times, as well, to try to manipulate believers. 

Fear of being labeled a bigot or closed-minded. Fear of missing out on things. Fear of being repressed or controlled. Fear of all this being wasted effort, because it's not true anyway. Fear of societal shame and ridicule. Fear of being deceived or lied to. And in some extreme cases, fear of loss of employment or invasion of privacy. 

I'll admit that the church has sometimes used fear, but the critics also need to get off their high horses and recognize that they, as a group, have done the same. 

Perhaps you'd care to provide some specific examples/quotes?