Follow F.A.I.R, They Know the Way

[smac97]

On 7/16/2022 at 8:57 AM, Fair Dinkum said:

Quote

Ok. So you are still a theist though skeptical of the LDS truth claims?

I'm a skeptic of unprovable claims

How do you quantify when a claim is "provable" and when it is not?

What quantum of evidence do you have in mind?  Preponderance?  Clear and convincing?  Beyond reasonable doubt?

What forms of evidence do you acknowledge as being competent, probative, and "admissible" to prove or disprove a religious truth claim?

Thanks,

-Smac

[Zosimus]

On 7/18/2022 at 6:11 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

Oh, you saw that name too? Gotta be the longest word I’ve ever seen — in any language. 

According to Guiness World Records, the official name for Bangkok is the longest place name at 168 letters!

Krungthepmahanakhonamonrattanakosinmahintharaayuthayamahadilokphopnoppharatratchathaniburiromudomratchaniwetmahasathanamonpimanawatansathitsakkathattiyawitsanukamprasit

[Calm]

32 minutes ago, Zosimus said:

According to Guiness World Records, the official name for Bangkok is the longest place name at 168 letters!

Krungthepmahanakhonamonrattanakosinmahintharaayuthayamahadilokphopnoppharatratchathaniburiromudomratchaniwetmahasathanamonpimanawatansathitsakkathattiyawitsanukamprasit

Edited July 21, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

Can’t paste it in my post.  It is number 4 in her list.  The video goes straight to the name in the clip in this alternative link that focuses on the name.  It means 

Quote

The city of angels, the great city, the eternal jewel city, the impregnable city of God Indra, the grand capital of the world endowed with nine precious gems, the happy city, abounding in an enormous Royal Palace that resembles the heavenly abode where reigns the reincarnated god, a city given by Indra and built by Vishnukarma.

https://yourthaiguide.com/real-name-of-bangkok/

Edited July 21, 2022 by Calm

[Hamba Tuhan]

12 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

Best to be skeptical of extraordinary claims, especially when they are made up. 

I'm not surprised that the Himba data are actually different to how they were presented. I spent nearly four months living on an island where all of the local languages had a single word for the blue/green spectrum. To them, the sky and grass are the same colour, but they had no trouble recognising that they were different 'shades' of that colour.

Interestingly, 'grue' (green-blue) is a common megacategory when it comes to basic colour terms ... and also an inexplicably persistent one.

But the point remains that the late development of a distinct term for blue appears to be universal across languages, typically arising after white/light, black/dark, red, yellow, and green but before brown, purple, orange, and grey (see same link). Interestingly, though websites will state something different, Indonesian still has no real word for orange, and the word for brown is a delicious loan-word: cokelat (i.e., 'chocolate'!). It's so recent that my elderly housekeeper in Jakarta didn't even know it. Anything dark brown, she called merah (red), and anything light brown/tan, she called kuning (yellow).

I like the summary from the link above:

Quote

It is very likely that social factors such as trade and conquest drive the evolution of color vocabularies. It seems clear that culture plays a significant role in both the origins and the boundaries of color categories. Exactly what is that role? Can culture override perceptually based constraints? It appears that a proper understanding of even the denotations – let alone the connotations – of a  language’s color terms requires a proper grasp of the relative contributions of biological, cultural, and environmental factors.

 

Edited July 21, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[Hamba Tuhan]

On 7/16/2022 at 3:24 AM, Fair Dinkum said:

The church ... makes promises in this life that will only be paid after we die ... We're banking on it being true, on them being able to deliver the rewards. but what if it's all just a huge religious Ponzi Scheme? That we've all fallen for a fraud. How would we know?  Seriously how would you know if you've been duped? ... IF its all just made up, ... there are some of us that would like to know that in THIS life.

Important points. For me, the answer is based fully on what happens 'in THIS life'. It has been my experience, repeated now to the point of certitude, that what the Church promises in this life is reliably, consistently, and predictably fulfilled. As a result, I'm willing to trust that the remaining promises -- i.e., the ones pertaining exclusively to 'after we die' -- will be similarly realised.

And even if they aren't for some reason, what a wild, wonderful, abundant life it has given me in the here and now!

Edited July 21, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[Scott Lloyd]

10 hours ago, smac97 said:

This guy is a rock star:

Thanks,

-Smac

I’m trying to reinvent myself these days as one who does audiobook and voiceover narration, but seeing this, I realize there are heights to which I’ll never rise. 

[Kenngo1969]

41 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I’m trying to reinvent myself these days as one who does audiobook and voiceover narration, but seeing this, I realize there are heights to which I’ll never rise. 

Is there anywhere on line where I might hear the dulcet tones of your no-doubt mellifluous voice, Sir?   

[Kenngo1969]

@Calm

Quote

The city of angels, the great city, the eternal jewel city, the impregnable city of God Indra, the grand capital of the world endowed with nine precious gems, the happy city, abounding in an enormous Royal Palace that resembles the heavenly abode where reigns the reincarnated god, a city given by Indra and built by Vishnukarma.

Other than those things, there's nothing particularly special about it, though, right?     

I could imagine certain visitors coming to the city expecting Nirvana and to be fed by manna from heaven (or whatever its equivalent in, say, the Buddhist tradition is), only to have a serious, serious letdown!  The Bangkok Tourism and Visitors Bureau has its work cut out for it!

[Kenngo1969]

9 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I’m trying to reinvent myself these days as one who does audiobook and voiceover narration, but seeing this, I realize there are heights to which I’ll never rise. 

You should start a podcast.  You could combine the best of both worlds, the line of work in which, already, you're established, with your desire to branch out into more public (albeit, in the case of voiceover and narration, somewhat anonymous) pursuits.  I would love to help  (say, the "Scott & Ken Podcast" ), though I hasten to add, my own experience in broadcasting is limited to a quarter (yes, my education occurred that long ago) in radio production more than a quarter century ago, now; and I know nothing about podcasting.

[Kenngo1969]

For the life of me, I can't understand how that lady possibly made it into the tourism business ... she's so ... shy and reserved!    

[Scott Lloyd]

10 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Is there anywhere on line where I might hear the dulcet tones of your no-doubt mellifluous voice, Sir?   

Far too early in the game for that. 
 

I had a successful stint during the last legislative session as the reading clerk for the Utah Senate. More than a few folks suggested I ought to be doing audio narration. So I’m dipping my toe into it by volunteering to record books for the blind under the auspices of the state library division. In fact, I’m headed to a session right now. 

[Kenngo1969]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Far too early in the game for that. 
 

I had a successful stint during the last legislative session as the reading clerk for the Utah Senate. More than a few folks suggested I ought to be doing audio narration. So I’m dipping my toe into it by volunteering to record books for the blind under the auspices of the state library division. In fact, I’m headed to a session right now. 

Chances are, I'll still be around when you are ready.  Let me know.  

[pogi]

On 7/15/2022 at 11:24 AM, Fair Dinkum said:

Seriously how would you know if you've been duped?  I recognize that most here don't care.  They're happy in their beliefs and are willing to live their lives as faithful believing Mormons through to their eventual deaths.  But IF its all just made up, if the emperor has no clothes,  there are some of us that would like to know that in THIS life.

I think most do care if they have been duped - those who remain faithful have reason to believe they have not. 

Throughout this thread, you seem to deeply and repeatedly yearn for a knowledge that consists of absolute certainty.  I don't think absolutism is a healthy philosophy or realistic approach to knowledge.  You will simply be ditching one emperor (the church) for another (secularism), with no way of knowing or proving with 100% certainty that either emperor has clothing.  I suggest a more pragmatic approach to spiritual knowledge.

Absolute certainty of absolute truth is unattainable in mortality, so why pine for and seek after something that you can't have?  On the other hand, personal well-being, happiness, and spiritual fulfillment are attainable - and are therefor more useful than absolute knowledge of absolute truth.   If we make those things (well being, happiness, spiritual fulfillment) the measure of truth, as outlined in Alma 32), then we can have the satisfaction of enjoying knowledge of spiritual truth in mortality. 

In the pragmatic approach to knowledge, you can know in THIS life.   You can reap the fruit in this life.    
Research shows that religion provides well-being, happiness, and spiritual fulfillment in greater measure than anything else.  Mormonism, in particular, is tied with Judaism as providing the greatest measure of happiness/well-being.  Something to chew on.  

Having worked as a hospice nurse for several years, I can testify that such beliefs do have real power with attainable benefits in this life - you don't need to wait for the next life to realize the benefits of belief/faith. 

Edited July 21, 2022 by pogi

[mfbukowski]

On 7/15/2022 at 10:24 AM, Fair Dinkum said:

Why is the LDS faith the whipping boy for your scientific crusade?

Well if by whipping boy you mean holding them accountable for their truth claims, the Why I care is because Mormonism is my tribe.  The church demands complete loyalty in this life and makes promises in this life that will only be paid after we die. Eternal Life, families being together forever, godhood (or has that one been taken off the the plate).  I think given all that the church demands of us and take aka 10%) we deserve to be told the truth and we also deserve to be able to  hold them accountable when their teachings are proven to be false...because so much is being asked of us to sacraficed in this life as believers.  We're banking on it being true, on them being able to deliver the rewards. but what if it's all just a huge religious Ponzi Scheme? That we've all fallen for a fraud.  How would we know?  Seriously how would you know if you've been duped?  I recognize that most here don't care.  They're happy in their beliefs and are willing to live their lives as faithful believing Mormons through to their eventual deaths.  But IF its all just made up, if the emperor has no clothes,  there are some of us that would like to know that in THIS life.

Grow up!

Where is there scientific evidence for "human rights"?

Where is the evidence that every belief needs evidence?

THAT IS THE BIGGEST NAKED EMPEROR OF ALL!!

"All men created equal?"

All are "made up".

Where are the "rights" everyone wants to believe are "real"?

My gosh!

We are talking about BELIEFS "made up" because they are SWEET to us and benefit mankind, and CANNOT be proven empirically.

Alma 32 dude!

WHY DO WE HAVE TO EVEN LISTEN TO THESE CHILDISH ARGUMENTS?

Where is the empirical evidence to prove that every useful belief has to be empirically proven?

ALL EMPERORS HAVE NO CLOTHES BUT THOSE WE PROVIDE THEM.

Same for scientific paradigms that change daily!

When will we learn?  Grow up!

Edited July 21, 2022 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

13 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Seriously how would you know if you've been duped?  I recognize that most here don't care.  They're happy in their beliefs and are willing to live their lives as faithful believing Mormons through to their eventual deaths. 

ERROR, QUOTE IS FROM @Fair Dinkum not Bukowski

Because the beliefs, like belief in human rights, are "sweet" to them, and confirmed by the still small voice.

Sorry if you have not felt it.

Edited July 21, 2022 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

33 minutes ago, pogi said:

Research shows that religion provides well-being, happiness, and spiritual fulfillment in greater measure than anything else.  Mormonism, in particular, is tied with Judaism as providing the greatest measure of happiness/well-being.  Something to chew on.  

Thanks

I think it is time for a hiatus 

Edited July 21, 2022 by mfbukowski

[Kenngo1969]

If I did my best to minister to my Brothers and Sisters, to succor their needs, to "lift up the hands that hang down, and strengthen the feeble knees" (Doctrine and Covenants 81:5), to serve in God's Kingdom, to "love the Lord [my] God with all [my] heart, might, mind and strength" (see Matthew 22:37) to love my neighbor as myself, to do unto others as I would have them do unto me (see Matthew 7:12); if I did my best to make my life and the lives of those around me as good as I could make them before shuffling off this mortal coil, only to be met, at the judgment, by the equivalent of Wallace Shawn playing God exactly as he played Vizzini in The Princess Bride laughing uproariously and telling me, "You fool!  It was the Catholics!  The Catholics had it right all along," I would be completely OK with that.

While others' mileage may vary, I do the good things I do (to the extent that I do them: lots of work needed there!  ) because I believe they please God and because I believe they make me ... and hopefully others ... happy, and they bless all of our lives in the here and now, not because I expect to win some sort of Giant Cosmic Lottery.  As I said, others' mileage may vary. 

Edited July 21, 2022 by Kenngo1969

[Scott Lloyd]

On 7/21/2022 at 12:18 PM, mfbukowski said:

Well if by whipping boy you mean holding them accountable for their truth claims, the Why I care is because Mormonism is my tribe.

Faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are not a “tribe”; they’re a covenant people, the membership of which depends upon entering into and adhering to sacred covenants. Ergo, it has everything to do with covenants and nothing to do with cultural customs, folkways, nationalities, race, politics, socio-economic class, profession, lineage. The notion of a “Mormonism tribe” is mythical. 
 

And as I think about, I realize that might be one reason it was prudent for President Nelson to ditch the use of nicknames and initialisms as appellations for the covenant people. 
 

Clarification: the above quote is from Fair Dinkum, not mfbukowski. There was an apparent software glitch. 

Edited July 22, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The notion of a “Mormonism tribe” is mythical. 

Mormonism can be applied to the greater culture surrounding church members rather than just church members themselves, but of course the Church will always have a significant impact on those living in the midst of Mormon culture, whether in small pockets of branches and families or larger geographical areas such as states with high Latter-day Saint and others population.  Using tribe to refer to a shared culture and language is not unusual usage, a tribe may be connected by social or economic  ties and not necessarily blood ties according to standard definitions.  And if Fair Dinkum was born in a Latter-day Saint family, he shares social ancestry as well.

I personally don’t like the current trend that uses tribe to refer to modern social groups rather than traditional, but I still don’t think it is contrary to appropriate usage.

Edited July 22, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Clarification: the above quote is from Fair Dinkum, not mfbukowski. There was an apparent software glitch. 

It is not a glitch.  If you quote from a quote in someone’s post rather than the original post, it will attached the ‘someone’s’ name to the quote rather than the original poster.

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

It is not a glitch.  If you quote from a quote in someone’s post rather than the original post, it will attached the ‘someone’s’ name to the quote rather than the original poster.

Guilty as charged.

I skim too quickly and react sometimes to the WORDS, not the person

"Who's the idiot who wrote THIS??"

And then it turns out that it looks like I am the idiot !

I guess I am!!

🤔

That's twice this week !! 🤥🤪

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are not a “tribe”; they’re a covenant people, the membership of which depends upon entering into and adhering to sacred covenants. Ergo, it has everything to do with covenants and nothing to do with cultural customs, folkways, nationalities, race, politics, socio-economic class, profession, lineage. The notion of a “Mormonism tribe” is mythical. 
 

And as I think about, I realize that might be one reason it was prudent for President Nelson to ditch the use of nicknames and initialisms as appellations for the covenant people. 
 

Clarification: the above quote is from Fair Dinkum, not mfbukowski. There was an apparent software glitch. 

Yep.

I agree with you! 🤓

[Calm]

22 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Guilty as charged.

I skim too quickly and react sometimes to the WORDS, not the person

"Who's the idiot who wrote THIS??"

And then it turns out that it looks like I am the idiot !

I guess I am!!

🤔

That's twice this week !! 🤥🤪

I do this quite a bit as I remember a post and like you, skim for the words; but manage to catch myself most of the time as the wrong name in the quote usually jumps out at me…and then I have to track back for the original one. 

[Islander]

On 7/18/2022 at 2:10 AM, Zosimus said:

From the Publisher's Summary of Traced:

"Traced reveals that today’s Native Americans were not the first but replaced earlier inhabitants whose genealogical origins remain unknown."

Well, we are talking about 9,000-12,000 years ago earlier. According to the BoB the Lehite company arrive about 2600 years ago and grew to be millions. If the DNA of those that arriver earlier can be traced, it is statistically speaking impossible that ALL Lehite DNA could be wiped out. The statistical probabilities that no trace of DNA of a population numbering in the millions could be wiped out in a land mass like the American continent are astronical. Especially when other groups, much smaller in number survived from much earlier to the present. It does not hold water.

Read the while book, not just a summary.