DCP Comments on the Nature of Doctrine

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_guy sajer
_Emeritus
Posts: 1372
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:16 am

Post by _guy sajer »

LifeOnaPlate wrote:
Some Schmo wrote:Again, I am moved by this thread to make the simple observation, apologists are either complete idiots, or intellectually dishonest (or, most likely, both).

How anyone has even a modicum of respect for DCP (or any other apologist) is beyond reason. The only thing they're good for is laughing stock.


Those who claim the above regarding apologists are either complete idiots, or intellectually dishonest (or, most likely, both). Does that sound fair?


Intellectual dishonesty is a rather common trait, and I assert that it is rampant among Mormon apologists and rank and file (as well as among the general population). One attribute of intellectual dishonesty is refusal to apply standards to one's own beliefs and arguments that one applies to others. This behavioral trait is rife among the FARMSistas, thus I think Schmo's comment, at least part of it, reasonable.

While at BYU, I was actually sanctioned for, among other things, teaching my students that intellectual honesty demands consistency in how we evaluate ours vs. other arguments. Thus I'd go further and argue that not only is intellectual dishonesty common among believers and apologists, it is actually actively encouraged.

And yes, I think this is accusation is fair.
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
Post Reply