And now, Gina Colvin faces a Disciplinary Council.

[Scott Lloyd]

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I do not. I find Socrates insufferable. I think I prefer Sophists. Can you imagine actually trying to hold a conversation with the guy while he insists on his ignorance on any topic while asking leading questions designed to force you to agree with him? Just say what you think you pretentious git!

Or maybe I was just in a bad mood last time I read Plato.......

Socratic questioning is only annoying if you don’t like seeing the weakness of an argument or position exposed. Otherwise, it can be fun to observe. 

[6EQUJ5]

15 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Do you often let people know you admire sophistry, or was your last post to Smac an unusually unguarded moment of candor? 

Lulz. You got me! Oh no!

But seriously:

Oh I freely admit that I admire a sophist's command of language.  How that language is manipulated and used to distort original arguments and guide both emotion and sentiment.  So, I admire these qualities in Smac.  And I will freely admit it.  And, while you certainly do not have Smac's language and communication ability, you have other qualities that I admire.

Edited December 10, 2018 by 6EQUJ5

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Socratic questioning is only annoying if you don’t like seeing the weakness of an argument or position exposed. Otherwise, it can be fun to observe. 

No, I find it annoying even then. It seems so disinguous and indirect. A kind of passive aggressive argumentation. If the dialogues are any indication it also requires a witless easily controllable sap to work effectively.

[Scott Lloyd]

14 minutes ago, 6EQUJ5 said:

Lulz. You got me! Oh no!

But seriously:

Oh I freely admit that I admire a sophist's command of language.  How that language is manipulated and used to distort original arguments and guide both emotion and sentiment.  So, I admire these qualities in Smac.  And I will freely admit it.  And, while you certainly do not have Smac's language and communication ability, you have other qualities that I admire.

 

Complimenting one on the skills with which he pursues nefarious ends strikes me as damning with faint praise. But as I said, it’s academic anyway, because you are misjudging Smac and, as he said, in the absence of any valid examples, merely name calling. 

Edited December 10, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

47 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

No, I find it annoying even then. It seems so disinguous and indirect. A kind of passive aggressive argumentation. If the dialogues are any indication it also requires a witless easily controllable sap to work effectively.

Hmm. We’ve been talking about sophistry here. Seems to me Socratic questioning could be an effective way to counter sophistry. 

Edited December 10, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[6EQUJ5]

23 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Complimenting one on the skills with which he pursues nefarious ends strikes me as damning with faint praise. But as I said, it’s academic anyway, because you are misjudging Smac and, as he said, in the absence of any valid examples, merely name calling. 

You (wrongly) assume that sophistry is always employed towards nefarious ends.  

[smac97]

3 minutes ago, 6EQUJ5 said:

You (wrongly) assume that sophistry is always employed towards nefarious ends.  

Oh, brother.

Quote

Modern usage

In modern usage, sophism, sophist and sophistry are used disparagingly. A sophism is a specious argument for displaying ingenuity in reasoning or for deceiving someone.^[23] A sophist is a person who reasons with clever but fallacious and deceptive arguments.^[24][25]

Let's move on.

Thanks,

-Smac

[The Nehor]

25 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Hmm. We’ve been talking about sophistry here. Seems to me Socratic questioning could be an effective way to counter sophistry. 

Not in my experience. Sophists will not play the game. Maybe the ancient ones did?

[alter idem]

On 12/8/2018 at 2:16 PM, smac97 said:

Gina Colvin has posted some thoughts about her upcoming council.  

Oi.  What an unpleasant read.  

Thanks,

-Smac

 

I read her posting;

Gina Colvin is a product of her 'victimhood'.  A mean man is tearing her 'eternal family' apart--and apparently she'd rather it was a mean council of not one but a dozen men--she seems offended that she doesn't warrant the Stake High Council. 

And she's blaming this man for the predicament she finds herself in.  She joined another church, does she not realize that removing her name from the records of the church is a formality at this point??  And the absolute irony is that she's bemoaning the loss of an 'eternal family' which she doesn't even believe in.

Worst of all, she's in denial as to who's responsible for causing all this pain to her family.  She's not a victim, she made choices and she's dealing with the consequences.  It's obvious she wants to control other peoples' choices, but it just doesn't work like that.  Choice is why we came down here in the first place (but maybe her new religion doesn't teach that), and there are plenty of men and women in the church who have lost their faith and yet, they remain in the church in order to support  their loved ones who still believe, something she could have done. 

For her sake I sure hope she has a burning testimony that the Anglican church is God's one and only true church on the earth, because any thing less than a firm conviction she's made the right choice is not worth what she's done.

What's been done can't be undone,  but she can choose to accept responsibility and make choices now to protect her family relationships--and stop pretending to be a victim.

[Scott Lloyd]

26 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Not in my experience. Sophists will not play the game. Maybe the ancient ones did?

If the unsoundness of their argument is left exposed, it doesn’t matter whether they’re willing to “play the game” or not. 

[Hestia]

Exiled has been exiled from the thread for off topic personal posts.  Anyone else continuing to post off topic will join him.  

And in the future, if everyone will please fight the impulse to get into personal back and forth squabbles on stuff that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic and that no one else cares about, all the mods would be most grateful and consider it an early Christmas present.

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

If the unsoundness of their argument is left exposed, it doesn’t matter whether they’re willing to “play the game” or not. 

The solution to Socratic Questioning is to ignore the leading questions or twist them back your way.

[Scott Lloyd]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

The solution to Socratic Questioning is to ignore the leading questions or twist them back your way.

Meh. 

This is a derail. I agree with Smac that it’s time to move on. 

Edited December 10, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[The Nehor]

40 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Meh. 

This is a derail. I agree with Smac that it’s time to move on. 

Socrates: What is the basis for your belief that it is time to move on?

See, don’t you want to punch him in the face?

Nehor will be moving on now because he is a sane and well-adjusted person as shown by his referring to himself in the third person.

And to bring this thread back on track I think this sister should be excommunicated and find peace in her new faith. Instead my prediction is she will continue to pick at the scab online for some time so it continues to bleed.

[ksfisher]

New post on patheos by Colvin dated yesterday.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/kiwimormon/2018/12/when-the-lds-church-disciplines-a-woman/

Interesting paragraph here:

"I have certainly made no secret of the fact that I have never had a testimony of Church Presidents or General Authorities or the hierarchy, or the patriarchy, or the corporate operations of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that is as bright or lovely as my testimony and love for Jesus Christ.    In fact, I’ve spent years arguing against spiritual abuse as seen in the power-posturing; The idolatry of Presidents; The authoritarianism; The whitewashing; The gagging; The expectations of blind obedience to poor policy;  The American cultural imperialism; The Patriarchy or my antipathy for poor leaders who weigh the people down spiritually."

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, ksfisher said:

New post on patheos by Colvin dated yesterday.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/kiwimormon/2018/12/when-the-lds-church-disciplines-a-woman/

Interesting paragraph here:

"I have certainly made no secret of the fact that I have never had a testimony of Church Presidents or General Authorities or the hierarchy, or the patriarchy, or the corporate operations of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that is as bright or lovely as my testimony and love for Jesus Christ.    In fact, I’ve spent years arguing against spiritual abuse as seen in the power-posturing; The idolatry of Presidents; The authoritarianism; The whitewashing; The gagging; The expectations of blind obedience to poor policy;  The American cultural imperialism; The Patriarchy or my antipathy for poor leaders who weigh the people down spiritually."

Blech!

I think what I find most unpalatable about limelight-seeking apostates might be their self-rationalizing preachiness. 

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

 

And to bring this thread back on track I think this sister should be excommunicated and find peace in her new faith. Instead my prediction is she will continue to pick at the scab online for some time so it continues to bleed.

Yes! Leave already, for crying out loud!

Such a tendency somehow makes me think of this song parody I just saw on Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/637867622/posts/10155826662857623/

Edited to add: Of course, what I would most prefer is for her to repent in humility and return with full purpose of heart. But barring that, ...

Edited December 10, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[ksfisher]

42 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Blech!

I think what I find most unpalatable about limelight-seeking apostates might be their self-rationalizing preachiness. 

It's seems to be a pretty good summary of everything I've ever read of hers.  I'm not sure why I read it, but I'm also the kind of person who slows down for a car crash.

[Storm Rider]

2 hours ago, ksfisher said:

New post on patheos by Colvin dated yesterday.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/kiwimormon/2018/12/when-the-lds-church-disciplines-a-woman/

Interesting paragraph here:

"I have certainly made no secret of the fact that I have never had a testimony of Church Presidents or General Authorities or the hierarchy, or the patriarchy, or the corporate operations of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that is as bright or lovely as my testimony and love for Jesus Christ.    In fact, I’ve spent years arguing against spiritual abuse as seen in the power-posturing; The idolatry of Presidents; The authoritarianism; The whitewashing; The gagging; The expectations of blind obedience to poor policy;  The American cultural imperialism; The Patriarchy or my antipathy for poor leaders who weigh the people down spiritually."

Gads, she is tiresome. Bubblegum feminist wordplay with a dash of good old Cold War communistic propaganda thrown in for good measure. Please, let this pitiful 15 minutes of fame be gone soon. 

[rockpond]

3 hours ago, ksfisher said:

New post on patheos by Colvin dated yesterday.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/kiwimormon/2018/12/when-the-lds-church-disciplines-a-woman/

Interesting paragraph here:

"I have certainly made no secret of the fact that I have never had a testimony of Church Presidents or General Authorities or the hierarchy, or the patriarchy, or the corporate operations of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that is as bright or lovely as my testimony and love for Jesus Christ.    In fact, I’ve spent years arguing against spiritual abuse as seen in the power-posturing; The idolatry of Presidents; The authoritarianism; The whitewashing; The gagging; The expectations of blind obedience to poor policy;  The American cultural imperialism; The Patriarchy or my antipathy for poor leaders who weigh the people down spiritually."

Seems like an accurate summary of her concerns with the Church.  I wonder if she will continue with the "A Thoughtful Faith" podcast post-excommunication?  She did some nice interviews with great insights over the years.

Another quote from the above linked article:

"Eventually I had to find another place to worship because I couldn’t bear the weekly diet of church that made only vague references to Jesus in favor of endless and repetitious affirmations that the church is true and that President so and so is a Prophet of God and scandalously poor exegesis."

I think that contains some truth that we could really do well to work on.

Edited December 10, 2018 by rockpond

[The Nehor]

14 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Seems like an accurate summary of her concerns with the Church.  I wonder if she will continue with the "A Thoughtful Faith" podcast post-excommunication?  She did some nice interviews with great insights over the years.

Another quote from the above linked article:

"Eventually I had to find another place to worship because I couldn’t bear the weekly diet of church that made only vague references to Jesus in favor of endless and repetitious affirmations that the church is true and that President so and so is a Prophet of God and scandalously poor exegesis."

I think that contains some truth that we could really do well to work on.

Please stop trying to validate her. TIA.

I do not want inspired affirmations about our prophet holding Priesthood keys or that the Church is the Kingdom of God on Earth to diminish at all. I do not want to work on things that annoy her. She is apostate. If we are not annoying her we are doing the gospel wrong.

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, The Nehor said:

Please stop trying to validate her. TIA.

I do not want inspired affirmations about our prophet holding Priesthood keys or that the Church is the Kingdom of God on Earth to diminish at all. I do not want to work on things that annoy her. She is apostate. If we are not annoying her we are doing the gospel wrong.

Sorry to have disturbed your echo chamber.  As I mentioned, I think she makes some important points.  That doesn't mean I agree with everything she says or that I think she doesn't deserve excommunication for joining another church.  Just that there is some truth to what she has said.  And I think there is merit to some of her criticisms.

Edited December 10, 2018 by rockpond

[HappyJackWagon]

37 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Sorry to have disturbed your echo chamber.  As I mentioned, I think she makes some important points.  That doesn't mean I agree with everything she says or that I think she doesn't deserve excommunication for joining another church.  Just that there is some truth to what she has said.  And I think there is merit to some of her criticisms.

How dare you disturb the echo chamber! 

Nehor is making a slight variation on the usual persecution complex. If the church and/or its people are being persecuted, it must mean they are true...because Satan.

Likewise, the church must be true and we must be doing it right because Apostate Gina doesn't like it. Obviously an apostate would never have any valid criticisms so we should ignore the entire POV since they are only being led by...Satan.

OR the church and its members could reflect and see if there actually are legitimate concerns and criticisms. But alas, that can't happen because if someone considers a thought from an apostate, they are giving a victory to...Satan.