Deseret News articles on insincere questions

[Calm]

Came across this looking at another article, thought it might be applicable here since we get the occasional “just looking for answers” gambit here, though thankfully I think most are quite sincere and actually looking to learn (which is what makes the board fun, imo).

https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2024/11/18/pretended-curiosity-attacking-faith/
 

Quote

For any genuine question, of course, there are certain elements that are non negotiable, such as being aware of limitations to our current knowledge, curious to explore new perspectives and open to learn from the inquiry.

None of that shows up in a counterfeit question, which, by its highly finessed nature, betrays something else going on.

“Simple questions are a prime tactic for the propagandist,” says Richard Williams, founding director of Brigham Young University’s Wheatley Institute. Compared with authentic questions that run “deep enough to set the stage for answers of substance,” this professor argues that questions are often being used to “set traps for the vulnerable and uninformed” as they are “carefully framed to direct the reader in a particular, predetermined (though very subtly arranged) direction and to predetermined answers.”

Rich Williams is a former professor of my husband and mine, I used to babysit his kids.  One of the few people who have ever made me feel unsmart (it is probably impossible for me to feel stupid, I am too arrogant for that), but only because of his level of knowledge and the way his mind worked, not because of any attitude on his part.  He was such a help to my husband (I just had one class I took from him for fun and life got in the way of me investing what I should have).

Several other familiar names are quoted…

Quote

Arguably the most common way this kind of weaponized “truth seeking” shows up is in the common tendency of partisans to insist that “all the evidence” proves and justifies their party’s positions on the contested issues of the day. The same pattern shows up with industry-linked researchers who brazenly insist that “all the evidence” confirms the positive effects of whatever product they are hawking (with “no evidence,” of course, for any of its purported harms).

Similar absolutist claims have been used to assail different faith traditions more and more, especially from critics pretending that sacred books of scripture have “no evidence” archaeologically or otherwise backing them up.

When Daniel Peterson, emeritus professor of Islamic studies and Arabic at BYU, hears from critics that there’s “absolutely no evidence” for the Christian gospel or for faith in God, he pushes back. “Absolutely none? Really?”

“I can respect a person saying that there isn’t sufficient evidence to convince him or her,” Peterson told me. “But to assert that none exists at all is simply to assert a falsehood.” This scholar suggests that it’s basic “integrity” to be willing to “acknowledge that there is evidence that conflicts with one’s position,” even for “propositions that we ultimately reject.”

Edited November 22, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

The article includes a link to an analysis of the CES Letter…it will be no surprise to longtime posters here to learn I fall squarely in the camp that the purpose of the CES Letter from the very beginning was to destroy faith (based on my observations of what Runnells said at the beginning on Reddit as he crowdsourced criticisms of the Church).

https://www.publishpeace.net/p/were-these-ever-the-sincere-questions

I appreciate them pulling the evidence together so I don’t have to dig up it again whenever I feel the need to support my criticism of Runnell’s narrative of sincere questioning.

Edited November 22, 2024 by Calm

[InCognitus]

21 minutes ago, Calm said:

Came across this looking at another article, thought it might be applicable here since we get the occasional “just looking for answers” gambit here, though thankfully I think most are quite sincere and actually looking to learn (which is what makes the board fun, imo).

https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2024/11/18/pretended-curiosity-attacking-faith/

I'm really glad you posted this.

I read this article earlier in the week and I knew it was an important topic, and I contemplated starting a thread on it, but I never had the time to write something up to go with it.  You did a much better job of introducing the topic than anything I could come up with!  Thank you.

[Calm]

30 minutes ago, InCognitus said:

You did a much better job of introducing the topic than anything I could come up with!

Oh please, I have seen your posts, lol.

[Tacenda]

Thanks for sharing Calm, I can honestly say I didn't want to hurt others' faith in the church when I asked others about JS's polygamy. I was naive and thought I was in the dark. But when I asked visiting teachers and my neighbor, the reaction to my question was something that stopped me in my tracks. They hadn't heard of it, and thought it anti-Mormon lies. That's when I became like my avatar name, tacenda and shut up. I never wanted someone to go through what I had been or ruin testimonies. Now that it's more open for discussion, those that hadn't known will know that it's from church sources not anti information. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I can honestly say I didn't want to hurt others' faith in the church when I asked others about JS's polygamy. I was naive and thought I was in the dark

I never thought of you as insincere. Rather you were someone who got hit by an insincere ‘you deserve to know the truth’ website that put together quotes from different sources to make Joseph Smith, etc look like scum in how he treated women.  If you had been given all the factual information in its original form, you might have had the chance to not feel so betrayed or lied to by the Church (I know this is so because way back when Tacenda first shared her experience or close to it, I went to the website and checked all the quotes for one of the wives that really troubled her, Helen Mar Kimball, unfortunately that thread appears to be gone in one of the dumps).  But we haven’t been good in the past at helping our members deal with doubt besides telling them to pray about it.  Thankfully that has changed and it looks to me we are on track in approaching learning the gospel in a more mature, informed way.  Once it filters down to all the nooks and crannies, I believe things like the CES Letter won’t take out so many faithful, good members.

Unfortunately it is hard to rewrite that experience, that sense of betrayal once you have felt it.  I hope someday you will find a way back.  If you haven’t had a chance yet to watch the What is a Prophet panel discussion yet, I think you would like it. It seems to me to fit quite well with what has been the major issue you have had over the years.  I love the way the three have resolved the fallibility problem of our church leaders…probably because it’s my own way, only better supported and stated.

Edited November 22, 2024 by Calm

[JVW]

This reminds me of something I learned when I used to be active on FB and arguing with people about all sorts of things. I used to spend hours researching various topics across a wide variety of issues, but mostly scientific ones. What I learned was that there is evidence to support any belief that someone wants to believe. State a position on any scientific topic and I guarantee I can find a peer reviewed scientific article to support that belief. There are times when the research is low quality or mired in conflict-of-interest. But in many instances, I can find an RCT or meta-analysis to support that position. So I can't necessarily discard someone's opinion even if I disagree with it.

For me, this realization has translated into two things. 1) I rarely view anyone as stupid or beneath me in how they approach a discussion regardless of political, religious, or scientific persuasion. And 2) Because I can support, with evidence, anything I want to believe I choose to believe whatever makes me feel the least anxious, worried, nervous, sad, angry, or unhappy. And if that belief is new then I begin a journey of looking for evidence to help me reinforce that belief, because there is plenty of it out there.

In general I've lived a much more pleasant life under this attitude, and have a much easier time loving my enemies.

I wish more people had the perspective that the OP quoted author has.

[Tacenda]

15 hours ago, Calm said:

I never thought of you as insincere. Rather you were someone who got hit by an insincere ‘you deserve to know the truth’ website that put together quotes from different sources to make Joseph Smith, etc look like scum in how he treated women.  If you had been given all the factual information in its original form, you might have had the chance to not feel so betrayed or lied to by the Church (I know this is so because way back when Tacenda first shared her experience or close to it, I went to the website and checked all the quotes for one of the wives that really troubled her, Helen Mar Kimball, unfortunately that thread appears to be gone in one of the dumps).  But we haven’t been good in the past at helping our members deal with doubt besides telling them to pray about it.  Thankfully that has changed and it looks to me we are on track in approaching learning the gospel in a more mature, informed way.  Once it filters down to all the nooks and crannies, I believe things like the CES Letter won’t take out so many faithful, good members.

Unfortunately it is hard to rewrite that experience, that sense of betrayal once you have felt it.  I hope someday you will find a way back.  If you haven’t had a chance yet to watch the What is a Prophet panel discussion yet, I think you would like it. It seems to me to fit quite well with what has been the major issue you have had over the years.  I love the way the three have resolved the fallibility problem of our church leaders…probably because it’s my own way, only better supported and stated.

Going to for sure watch the Prophet panel, thanks!

[CV75]

I just can't wait for the followup article, "Insincere Answers," what about you???