Yeah, well his epistemology was weak.
He really meant that not all evidence is admissible, which is a good general concept. But his application of it was self-evidently bananas.
Yeah, well his epistemology was weak.
It was "self-serving" bananas and "undying loyalty" bananas. Packer had an image of what the church should look like and how members should hold it sacred. He was clearly not happy with anyone who failed to meet his exacting standard. I have this terrible, terrible regret that he never got to be prophet so that we could see just how exciting his vision of the church would have been.
I think you are right Corsair about Packer. Now with RMN, even Aunt Wendy has said he sat by and watching things not happen for too long. Now as profit, he is making changes left and right because he doesn’t have time to waste. He has to git it done now. Thank god that Packer was never profit. You probably would be excommunicated for not wearing a white shirt or taking the sacrament with your left hand.Corsair wrote: ↑Tue Jan 29, 2019 12:22 pmIt was "self-serving" bananas and "undying loyalty" bananas. Packer had an image of what the church should look like and how members should hold it sacred. He was clearly not happy with anyone who failed to meet his exacting standard. I have this terrible, terrible regret that he never got to be prophet so that we could see just how exciting his vision of the church would have been.
“The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown”
I think that "morality" began as a way to ensure the survival of the tribe (beginning with genus Homo). As the human race has "grown up" (with fits and starts, and some backtracking), we have developed a morality that balances the needs of the individual with the needs of the group. Packer's morality is top-down, patriarchal, and pre-historic. Pre-historic people cast out those who are different. Grown-ass human beings don't. (BTW, I think the genus Homo has earned the right to define morality for itself...unlike scientific facts/knowledge/truth/theories, etc)MoPag wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:10 pm Let's pretend he is in charge now, when the church is hemorrhaging members. And let's also pretend that he could get away with it. Would his truth lead him to save the church by eliminating the threats?
And in a twisted way this is kind of how the church operates. They don't physically kill people, but they do expel or excommunicate them from the tribe. There is a really deep part of our psyche that fears expulsion from the tribe. Because for our earliest ancestors excommunication meant death.
Do some triangulation with the moral concepts from these philosophical systems, and we come close to what I think moral truth is (or ought to be). Since then, the human race has grown up a little bit more, and now we have things like the "United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights".During this period, according to Jaspers' concept, new ways of thinking appeared in Persia, India, China and the Greco-Roman world in religion and philosophy, in a striking parallel development, without any obvious direct cultural contact between all of the participating Eurasian cultures. Jaspers identified key thinkers from this age who had a profound influence on future philosophies and religions, and identified characteristics common to each area from which those thinkers emerged.
Wikipedia, "Axial Age"
Packer's "truth" refuses to extend the "dignity" that all human beings deserve to those who are different from the majority. I think you can probably guess what I think about that...All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
I am with MoPag on this one. The truth has to matter, because falsehoods are a tool to oppress and abuse. If I can convince enough people that the "truth" is that people with detached earlobes are superior to others then I can perpetuate all kinds of evils on those who have attached earlobes. The worst of this is subtle falsehoods mixed with truth that give some humans power over others. WRT the church knowing the "truth" can potentially liberate me to enjoy life, live without guilt, to put more into my retirement, to choose my own undies, etc. Otherwise its time to suck up to the Q15 and jump when they say "jump". Damn straight truth matters, at least it matters to me.
This is why I get annoyed when I hear Mormons talking about moral relativism as some sort of gay/feminist/commie plot. All belief systems make culturally relative moral trade-offs. Here is another one in Mormonism: abortion is murder, but we condone it in the case of rape or incest. So it's still murder but you condone it anyway in certain cases? I don't want to get off on a tangent about abortion (please!) except to use it as an illustration of this concept. You could alternatively take a stance that abortion isn't a black-and-white proposition, that aborting an embryo the size of the head of a pin is not as much like murder as one that is the size of a walnut, compared to a 3rd trimester abortion which is a lot closer to the murder of a child. But no, the church excels in black-and-white thinking. Abortion must be murder or they can't insist that people stop doing it, but then they concede to making concessions to certain requirement which sees them relativistically defying their own black-and-white moral code. So what is truth regarding abortion and the Mormon god?
I with you, MoPag. My Lesbian daughter thought that a Packer presidency would be far too painful for the most vulnerable members of the church. My narcissistic amusement in watching the "President Packer" Train Wreck would not be worth it.MoPag wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 6:10 pm
This is extreme:
PACKERS TRUTH.png
But it's a "truth" the BOM supports.
"It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief." 1 Nephi 4
Let's pretend he is in charge now, when the church is hemorrhaging members. And let's also pretend that he could get away with it. Would his truth lead him to save the church by eliminating the threats?
And in a twisted way this is kind of how the church operates. They don't physically kill people, but they do expel or excommunicate them from the tribe. There is a really deep part of our psyche that fears expulsion from the tribe. Because for our earliest ancestors excommunication meant death.
I really like this comment slavereeno.slavereeno wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:22 pm The truth has to matter, because falsehoods are a tool to oppress and abuse. If I can convince enough people that the "truth" is that people with detached earlobes are superior to others then I can perpetuate all kinds of evils on those who have attached earlobes. The worst of this is subtle falsehoods mixed with truth that give some humans power over others. WRT the church knowing the "truth" can potentially liberate me to enjoy life, live without guilt, to put more into my retirement, to choose my own undies, etc. Otherwise its time to suck up to the Q15 and jump when they say "jump". Damn straight truth matters, at least it matters to me.
If enough detached earlobe folks can be made to understand that earlobe attachment isn't inherently significant they will also realize that attached earlobes can be made detached via an organized uprising of detached earlobers with scissors. That's why truth matters. If you want to keep your earlobe attached it's best not overinflate the're significance. The same might be said of the priesthood antenna.slavereeno wrote: ↑Wed Jan 30, 2019 8:22 pm I am with MoPag on this one. The truth has to matter, because falsehoods are a tool to oppress and abuse. If I can convince enough people that the "truth" is that people with detached earlobes are superior to others then I can perpetuate all kinds of evils on those who have attached earlobes.