Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

A gender related question


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, manol said:

Perhaps our physical body is actually INSIDE our spirit, rather than the other way around.

That would solve a number of issues as long as people didn’t freak about spirits sharing the same space like how some get disgusted by the idea they are breathing in air someone else exhaled, lol.  

Link to comment
11 hours ago, Calm said:

That would solve a number of issues as long as people didn’t freak about spirits sharing the same space like how some get disgusted by the idea they are breathing in air someone else exhaled, lol.  

Oh no!

Back to Aquinas and how many Angels can dance on the head of a pin!

Have you ever thought about how many atoms of oxygen you have breathed that Jesus also breathed? ;)

I was a strange kid!

Link to comment
23 hours ago, the narrator said:

I'm not asking for a scientific explanation. I'm asking what a person means when testifying that premortal spirits are gendered.

 

Our appearance, look, form, image, whatever word one chooses to describe it is male and female.  When a man dies and their spirit leaves, they still have the spirit body of a man.  Same with a woman.  They die they still have the spirit body of a woman.  If you see your dead great grandfather in the spirit world, he will not appear to you as a ball of light or a cloud of gas.  You will not seem him in the form of a woman.  You will see her spirit as a woman.  Same with the premortal world.  We existed before this earth was created as the sons and daughters of God.  We were male and female even though we did not have biological, mortal bodies yet.  Race and nationality have their origins in our biological world but our gender does not.   I have been a male for billions of years.   If a premortal male spirit was to visit you tonight, you will see that spirit as a man.   Male spirits are born into male biological bodies, female spirits into female biological bodies.  The scriptures say that only way to tell the difference between a spirit man and a resurrected man or woman is by a hand shake.   Both resurrected beings and spirits by visual appearance are basically identical. 

D&C 129

1 There are two kinds of beings in heaven, namely: Angels, who are resurrected personages, having bodies of flesh and bones—

2 For instance, Jesus said: Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

3 Secondly: the spirits of just men made perfect, they who are not resurrected, but inherit the same glory.

4 When a messenger comes saying he has a message from God, offer him your hand and request him to shake hands with you.

5 If he be an angel he will do so, and you will feel his hand.

6 If he be the spirit of a just man made perfect he will come in his glory; for that is the only way he can appear—

7 Ask him to shake hands with you, but he will not move, because it is contrary to the order of heaven for a just man to deceive; but he will still deliver his message.

8 If it be the devil as an angel of light, when you ask him to shake hands he will offer you his hand, and you will not feel anything; you may therefore detect him.

 

 

 

Link to comment
52 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Oh no!

Back to Aquinas and how many Angels can dance on the head of a pin!

Have you ever thought about how many atoms of oxygen you have breathed that Jesus also breathed? ;)

I was a strange kid!

I'd always go where my brain hurt and wonder what would there be if there was no universe, haha!

Link to comment
16 hours ago, CV75 said:
18 hours ago, the narrator said:

The part where you say that unembodied non-biological spirits are sexed or gendered.

You've got me mixed up with someone else--see how easy it is to get confused? And confuse yourself?

Well, in response to me saying :

On 8/9/2022 at 12:26 PM, the narrator said:

Can your OP question be even answered without understanding in what sense premortal unembodied, nonbiological spirits are gendered?

  You answered:

On 8/9/2022 at 4:01 PM, CV75 said:

Given that persons with connected spirit and element are gendered in various states (paradisaical, mortal, translated, resurrected, etc.), it would seem that they would also be gendered all along the spectrum of personage.

Did I misread you? Are you not saying here that premortal, unembodied spirts are gendered? Or is it my addition of "sexed" that bothers you here?

 

16 hours ago, CV75 said:

And what do you think you are you doing now -- dreams are thoughts. And why did you omit "Precisely. In a story." And why did you omit examples from your own fantasies which directly affect your body, transactions and interpersonal relationships? Is synesthesia an aspect of thought also? Are the 4 ways a square can have 3 holes just as invalid?

I have zero idea what you are arguing here. Are you claiming that something must make sense in reality if it can be dreamed of?

Link to comment
44 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Our appearance, look, form, image, whatever word one chooses to describe it is male and female.  When a man dies and their spirit leaves, they still have the spirit body of a man.  Same with a woman.  They die they still have the spirit body of a woman.  If you see your dead great grandfather in the spirit world, he will not appear to you as a ball of light or a cloud of gas.  You will not seem him in the form of a woman.  You will see her spirit as a woman.  Same with the premortal world.  We existed before this earth was created as the sons and daughters of God.  We were male and female even though we did not have biological, mortal bodies yet.  Race and nationality have their origins in our biological world but our gender does not.   I have been a male for billions of years.   If a premortal male spirit was to visit you tonight, you will see that spirit as a man.   Male spirits are born into male biological bodies, female spirits into female biological bodies.  The scriptures say that only way to tell the difference between a spirit man and a resurrected man or woman is by a hand shake.   Both resurrected beings and spirits by visual appearance are basically identical. 

 

I assume you accept that various physical attributes--such as hair and eye color, facial structure, body shape, etc--that you gain at birth because of DNA from your parents continue with your resurrected state. (And I guess one could suppose that a person's post-mortal spirit retains some aspects of the physical characteristics they attained through conception and birth--though I have no idea what it means for an unembodied spirit to have colored eyes or hair or a particular body build.) On the other hand, I assume you agree that it does not make sense for a premortal spirit to have physical attributes that have not yet been determined by the very particular chromosomal pairings that occur during a person's conception. If my assumptions are correct, then it would seem the same would apply with sex, which is also determined by a person's chromosomal pairings during conception, which antedate a person's spiritual creation by, I guess, billions of years.

Link to comment
35 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I'd always go where my brain hurt and wonder what would there be if there was no universe, haha!

Well that is a common semi-philosophical question "why is there something rather than nothing?"

Actually that is at the heart of all religions- what is the purpose of the universe?

Science says it doesn't have a purpose!  We say God's purpose is to "bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of humankind"

It's a pretty heavy question! I didn't  know you were a Philosopher! ;)

 

Link to comment
18 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Well that is a common semi-philosophical question "why is there something rather than nothing?"

Actually that is at the heart of all religions- what is the purpose of the universe?

Science says it doesn't have a purpose!  We say God's purpose is to "bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of humankind"

It's a pretty heavy question! I didn't  know you were a Philosopher! ;)

 

Yes, I guess so. Part of why I am no fun! Meaning I think too much and people around me, just want to move on in conversation, so I keep many things to myself except on here, haha.

Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, the narrator said:

I assume you accept that various physical attributes--such as hair and eye color, facial structure, body shape, etc--that you gain at birth because of DNA from your parents continue with your resurrected state. (And I guess one could suppose that a person's post-mortal spirit retains some aspects of the physical characteristics they attained through conception and birth--though I have no idea what it means for an unembodied spirit to have colored eyes or hair or a particular body build.) On the other hand, I assume you agree that it does not make sense for a premortal spirit to have physical attributes that have not yet been determined by the very particular chromosomal pairings that occur during a person's conception. If my assumptions are correct, then it would seem the same would apply with sex, which is also determined by a person's chromosomal pairings during conception, which antedate a person's spiritual creation by, I guess, billions of years.

I don't know why there is this persistence in category errors, confusing science with teleology.

I wish we all could get past mechanics and think about purpose.

We keep discussing how things work rather than if the design of the thing has a purpose in a religious paradigm.

Wittgenstein: "What cannot be said clearly should be passed over in silence"

Category mistakes are excellent examples of NOT thinking or speaking clearly !!

Henceforth I think I will follow his advice.  :)

 

 

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Yes, I guess so. Part of why I am no fun! Meaning I think too much and people around me, just want to move on in conversation, so I keep many things to myself except on here, haha.

Good for you, I for one am glad you haven't given up on us yet!

Link to comment
1 hour ago, the narrator said:

I assume you accept that various physical attributes--such as hair and eye color, facial structure, body shape, etc--that you gain at birth because of DNA from your parents continue with your resurrected state. (And I guess one could suppose that a person's post-mortal spirit retains some aspects of the physical characteristics they attained through conception and birth--though I have no idea what it means for an unembodied spirit to have colored eyes or hair or a particular body build.) On the other hand, I assume you agree that it does not make sense for a premortal spirit to have physical attributes that have not yet been determined by the very particular chromosomal pairings that occur during a person's conception. If my assumptions are correct, then it would seem the same would apply with sex, which is also determined by a person's chromosomal pairings during conception, which antedate a person's spiritual creation by, I guess, billions of years.

The premortal form does not match exactly with our biological bodies as our biological bodies appearances are influenced by a lot of facts.  A person who has Downs Syndrome probably did not have those characteristics in in their premortal form.   But the basic components are the same.  They have two legs, two hands, two feet, a head, eyes, ect.   There is no reason to believe that man is the only premortal spirit being.  My dogs also have spirits and in their premortal form, they had the appearance of dogs, male and female.  Gender is more than just biological.   It goes way way back.  10 billion years ago I existed as a male spirit being.  The mortal biological aspects only became a part of me 52 years ago.

Edited by carbon dioxide
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I don't know why there is this persistence in category errors, confusing science with teleology.

I wish we all could get past mechanics and think about purpose.

We keep discussing how things work rather than if the design of the thing has a purpose in a religious paradigm.

Wittgenstein: "What cannot be said clearly should be passed over in silence"

Category mistakes are excellent examples of NOT thinking or speaking clearly !!

Henceforth I think I will follow his advice.  :)

 

 

I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me or critiquing me. If Wittgenstein were to approach this question, he would argue that the religious meaning and use of "sex" and "gender" are not the same as the biological/social use--their uses are in two different language games. (As DZ Phillips might say, "It makes religious sense to say 'God's eyes are watching me," but not to ask 'What color are God's eyes"--unless you're a Mormon.") For Wittgenstein, religious talk of gendered premortal spirits would not be talk of actual metaphysical (or for Mormons supermaterial pseudometaphysical) states but as religious allegory or myth whose meaning is for religious instruction. Though, of course, Wittgenstein would likely see the same problem for claims of an actual premortal existence, of which nothing can be said and should be passed over in silence.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

They have two legs, two hands, two feet, a head, eyes, ect.   There is no reason to believe that man is the only premortal spirit being.  My dogs also have spirits and in their premortal form, they had the appearance of dogs, male and female.

The shape of our bodies is determined by our genetics, including how many legs, hands, and feet you have. Our bodily development in utero isn't determined by our cells conforming to some spirit blueprint. It is based on cellular growth guided by our chromosomes. This same process is what determines our sex. The same goes for dogs, cats, tuna, sequoias , dandelions, fungi, tubeworms, ants, frogs, mice, elephants, zebras, pigs, bees, mites, whales, etc.

Repeating something over and over again doesn't provide it with sense.

Link to comment
52 minutes ago, the narrator said:

For Wittgenstein, religious talk of gendered premortal spirits would not be talk of actual metaphysical (or for Mormons supermaterial pseudometaphysical) states but as religious allegory or myth whose meaning is for religious instruction. Though, of course, Wittgenstein would likely see the same problem for claims of an actual premortal existence, of which nothing can be said and should be passed over in silence.

Yep, fully agree! And discussing "actual" spiritual genitals falls into the latter category, and should be passed over in silence.

It is mixing categories or language games, hence my objection :)

Also "actual" as a concept in my opinion, as opposed to a more phenomenological approach, affirms Cartesianism and the correspondence theory of truth, both clearly tools of Satan !  ;) 😈

Seriously this is why so many LDS philosophers are Heideggerians like Faulconer or Pragmatists like Paulsen. Correspondence is no longer a truth theory, ie: distinguishing "actual" from "mythical", which works for religion.

It is why I found the philosophy before I found the church

If I had been born LDS, or did not find Neopragmatism and Anti-realism, I would have been gone long ago

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

In the cloud  

Good one! ROFL!

Link to comment
19 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Yep, fully agree! And discussing "actual" spiritual genitals falls into the latter category, and should be passed over in silence.

It is mixing categories or language games, hence my objection :)

Also "actual" as a concept in my opinion, as opposed to a more phenomenological approach, affirms Cartesianism and the correspondence theory of truth, both clearly tools of Satan !  ;) 😈

Seriously this is why so many LDS philosophers are Heideggerians like Faulconer or Pragmatists like Paulsen. Correspondence is no longer a truth theory, ie: distinguishing "actual" from "mythical", which works for religion.

It is why I found the philosophy before I found the church

If I had been born LDS, or did not find Neopragmatism and Anti-realism, I would have been gone long ago

Latter-day Saintism goes full in on the correspondence though. This is why so many here are stubbornly demanding that premortal spirits possess some sort of platonic gender.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, the narrator said:

Well, in response to me saying :

  You answered:

Did I misread you? Are you not saying here that premortal, unembodied spirts are gendered? Or is it my addition of "sexed" that bothers you here?

 

I have zero idea what you are arguing here. Are you claiming that something must make sense in reality if it can be dreamed of?

I was saying that since gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose, it would apply to a spirit. Biology is something else. See: Posted 18 hours ago

I am claiming that differentiation between types of thought processes is subjective, and this bias drives whether dreams, stories, fantasies, synesthesia and riddles -- others' or your own  -- make sense to us. Or whether and how they affect our lives and others' lives. The examples you put forth as nonsensical claims can be shown to make sense. If the notion that gender is biology and biology alone (whatever "biology" means to you), broader conceptualizations might not make sense to you.

Link to comment
43 minutes ago, the narrator said:

Latter-day Saintism goes full in on the correspondence though. This is why so many here are stubbornly demanding that premortal spirits possess some sort of platonic gender.

Exactly what we need to change! 

Understanding that human EXPERIENCE, filtered through a human brain-including religious experience, - is the only "reality" we can know as humans, is essential.

Religious experience, visions, etc. are as "real" as color perception, without which our ancestors in the trees might have killed themselves by eating the wrong color fruit.  All we have in our brains has a purpose for being there, as even evolution tells us !  God genes? Who knows but clearly Civilization could not exist without an inborn instinct for right and wrong, which we call a "conscience".

And what that instinct/still small voice tells us has "created" modern  civilized humans who believe in fairness, human rights, etc. and we LDS essentially worship and emulate the "Ideal Human" whom we even call "Our Father".  Like no other faith believes,  we are like Him, and can become as He is now!

For me that is a paradigm/parable worth dedicating one's life to!

Unfortunately, you are right, most LDS don't see that, but I know that many will through a movement called "Radical Orthodoxy", "Secular Theology"and other names, ultimately based on William James' notion of Radical Empiricism.

What we need are publications and books getting the word out in explanations pitched to the common man who has more on his mind than reading philosophy.  ;) 😎

Yes all perceptions go through a human brain, but that carries with it cultural prejudices and biases which might have been shown ineffective, as was Cartesianism and the correspondence theory, mixing science and religion

Most folks don't believe that God made the universe in 6 days anymore, but that doesn't mean God doesn't exist.

Yet others still confound the issue though, I guess!

 

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Did I misread you? Are you not saying here that premortal, unembodied spirts are gendered? Or is it my addition of "sexed" that bothers you here?

No, I think both paradigms are irrelevant to anything important.

We cannot answer either way, so we should "remain silent".

Again it's like asking how many angels can fill the same space, or "dance on a pinhead".

 

 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, the narrator said:

The shape of our bodies is determined by our genetics, including how many legs, hands, and feet you have. Our bodily development in utero isn't determined by our cells conforming to some spirit blueprint. It is based on cellular growth guided by our chromosomes. This same process is what determines our sex. The same goes for dogs, cats, tuna, sequoias , dandelions, fungi, tubeworms, ants, frogs, mice, elephants, zebras, pigs, bees, mites, whales, etc.

Repeating something over and over again doesn't provide it with sense.

Genetics corresponds to the biological body yes.  A computer consists of two parts.  The hardware and the software.    The same is with us.  Our bodies are the hardware.  Biology and science attempts to explain the origins and what that is about.  The software is our spirits which has nothing to do with biology and beyond the reach of modern science.  So yes genetics determines the shape of our biological  bodies but the hardware was patterned after the software as well.  When the Lord appeared to the brother of Jared, he appeared the same as he would appear in the flesh.   The brother of Jared saw the spiritual body of Christ and it had arms, legs, hands, a head.  When I die and see my mother who is passed, I will see her as the woman that she still is.  I will not see her as a ball of gas or light or a goat or a horse.  I will see her as a woman.  The same as she was before she was born.  When a 3 year old dies, they are in the spirit in an adult form.  So when a parent dies and sees their deceased child in the spirit, they don't see a spirit as a three  year old but as they would have been as an adult. 

If you read near death experiences, they see their loved was as they are and they don't describe them any different than with the same human forms they had while alive.  Nobody ever says they saw their father and he had 8 arms or like the the Stranger Things "Mind Flayer".  Anything different would be deception which is contrary to the order of heaven.  In some accounts, they see animals like dogs in the spirit world.   These dogs don't look different.  God does not put the spirit body of a whale in a cat.  That would not match what it is. 

Edited by carbon dioxide
Link to comment
1 hour ago, CV75 said:

I was saying that since gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose, it would apply to a spirit. Biology is something else. See: Posted 18 hours ago

I am claiming that differentiation between types of thought processes is subjective, and this bias drives whether dreams, stories, fantasies, synesthesia and riddles -- others' or your own  -- make sense to us. Or whether and how they affect our lives and others' lives. The examples you put forth as nonsensical claims can be shown to make sense. If the notion that gender is biology and biology alone (whatever "biology" means to you), broader conceptualizations might not make sense to you.

Okay, so you did say that unembodied non-biological spirits are gendered. Good to know I wasn't confused.

I am not saying that gender is biology alone. I'm saying that neither you nor anybody else here has offered one little bit of info as to what it means for a premortal spirit to be gendered--other than just shouting aloud and saying they are or comparing gender to a mere platonic state, which I find silly and nonsensical.

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

When the Lord appeared to the brother of Jared, he appeared the same as he would appear in the flesh.   The brother of Jared saw the spiritual body of Christ and it had arms, legs, hands, a head.

Well Jesus was apparently also a clone of God and did not inherit any of his mother's genes--else surely Jesus and the Father wouldn't look identical. So maybe the spirit "form" of Jesus already had a DNA-produced body to mimic. Things get more complicated though when some thought is put to it. What exactly did the Brother of Jared "see"? If I "see" something, it is because photons of light reflecting off physical object entering my eyes at various wavelengths stimulate different rods and cones in my retina that send signals through my optic nerve that my brains then interprets and reconstructs into mental images. Is it your opinion that light also reflects off of spirit bodies, or is it possible that "seeing" a spirit body does not involve light at all and instead exists as a mental image--such as when I close my eyes and "see" my children by imagining them jumping on a trampoline?

Such "seeing" would better fit within Joseph Smith's 19th century views of there being things that can only be seen with one's spiritual or mind's eyes. If so, then maybe most visionary experiences are not seeing spiritual things for supposed shapes but rather mental/spiritual creations that enable us to interact with what would otherwise be "nothing."

17 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

If you read near death experiences, they see their loved was as they are and they don't describe them any different than with the same human forms they had while alive. 

I find NDEs to be worthless--though maybe I shouldn't since they are a great way to earn $$$.

Link to comment
On 8/7/2022 at 10:25 PM, Fether said:

“Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.”

Are chromosomes a perfect way of figuring out what a person’s true and intended physical gender is?

Pretty close.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

When the Lord appeared to the brother of Jared, he appeared the same as he would appear in the flesh.   The brother of Jared saw the spiritual body of Christ and it had arms, legs, hands, a head. 

But perhaps that is because our mortal brains are wired to see humans in that form and not because that was actually the form he possessed..or rather not the only form he possessed.

I am trying to think of an analogy and hopefully a better one will come to me later, but two occur to me right now.  One is how expectation and experience drive perception.  If we are talking on the phone with someone we haven’t seen in years, do we see them in our heads (if we imagine in pictures) as they are now or as we saw them last?  Or perhaps our imagination ages them even.  But how close is it to reality?  Could it not be dramatically different?  Perhaps they have had plastic surgery and we never heard about it.  My sister-in-law changed her hair to blond from a dark brown and it took a few minutes to register who I saw.  What if in quickening, in seeing with our spiritual eyes we are actually not seeing the real image of God, but the one our minds are capable of seeing based on our experiences and expectations?  And that one is of a human form because our minds simply work that way?

The second analogy that occurs to me is how we humans form patterns and see something that is not really there, as occurs with pixels looked at individually are just dots of color, but if taken together with many others creates an image of a human.  What if all the perception information about spirits we are capable of processing results in a perceived pattern of a mortal physical body because our brain is made to perceive physical bodies and has been wired to see humans in a particular form through experience?  What if we are seeing a pattern that is intended to be seen as is the image on a screen are actually something else, like the screen image is really tiny dots?

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...