Force for good: Impact the church has made?
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 11832
- Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 2:05 am
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1372
- Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:16 am
Jason Bourne wrote:Not to be too technical, but in social science research, 'impact' is typically taken to imply a counterfactual--what would have happened in the absence of an intervention.
My guess is that in the absence of Mormonism, these same people would have been equally productive and happy in other religions, or they would be equally happy and productive without any religion. Add to this, the number of people made materially worse off due to their association with Mormonism, who might well have been happier without it, and I don't see much of a prospect that Mormonism's impact on the world has been significant in the least.
Mormonism won't survive indefinitely. It will go the way of most other small, insignificant, trivial, religions. When the history of the world is written a millennia from now, Mormonism won't even merit a footnote.
I disagree. It will not go away as long as there is religion, nor will it be small and insignificant. There are almost as many Mormons as Jews and in a way active Mormons almost become a cultural identity. Next studies state the Mormonism will grow and become much larger. Stark's number seem way off and are even higher than the Church predicts for itself. But 100 years from now there will be 50-65 million Mormons given current growth rates and assuming those hold and nothing happens to implode the Church.
I won't be alive 100 years from now, but if I were, I'd take that bet.
But who actually knows? You might be right, although I think that the 50-65 million is a bit far fetched.
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 ..."
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 16721
- Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am
Jason Bourne wrote:Many non Mormons in Utah have a low opinion of Mormons. Part of it is being in the minority. I am skeptical that you would find such low opinions else where. Most people just do not know a whole lot about the Church.
I was talking about people in Texas, not in Utah. I really haven't spoken to a lot of nonmembers here.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9207
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm
Runtu wrote:Jason Bourne wrote:Many non Mormons in Utah have a low opinion of Mormons. Part of it is being in the minority. I am skeptical that you would find such low opinions else where. Most people just do not know a whole lot about the Church.
I was talking about people in Texas, not in Utah. I really haven't spoken to a lot of nonmembers here.
I stand corrected.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4792
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm
Hi Jason,
I read, (I can't remember exactly where, maybe Collapse by Jared Diamond), that the rise and fall of an organization/religion is roughly a bell curve. In other words, however long it took to rise to its peak is approximately how long it will take to decline.
Given that the LDS church in my opinion, reached its peak a few decades ago, I think its decline will take about 150 years.
Maybe sooner, given how information is so easily accessible these days and how many religious myths will be even more difficult to believe and accept as truth.
Moreover, I have a sense the more the LDS church holds to its 1940 look and feel, the less it will seem mainstream in the future.
Could be wrong though... :-)
~dancer~
I disagree. It will not go away as long as there is religion, nor will it be small and insignificant. There are almost as many Mormons as Jews and in a way active Mormons almost become a cultural identity. Next studies state the Mormonism will grow and become much larger. Stark's number seem way off and are even higher than the Church predicts for itself. But 100 years from now there will be 50-65 million Mormons given current growth rates and assuming those hold and nothing happens to implode the Church.
I read, (I can't remember exactly where, maybe Collapse by Jared Diamond), that the rise and fall of an organization/religion is roughly a bell curve. In other words, however long it took to rise to its peak is approximately how long it will take to decline.
Given that the LDS church in my opinion, reached its peak a few decades ago, I think its decline will take about 150 years.
Maybe sooner, given how information is so easily accessible these days and how many religious myths will be even more difficult to believe and accept as truth.
Moreover, I have a sense the more the LDS church holds to its 1940 look and feel, the less it will seem mainstream in the future.
Could be wrong though... :-)
~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9207
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm
I read, (I can't remember exactly where, maybe Collapse by Jared Diamond), that the rise and fall of an organization/religion is roughly a bell curve. In other words, however long it took to rise to its peak is approximately how long it will take to decline.
Given that the LDS church in my opinion, reached its peak a few decades ago, I think its decline will take about 150 years.
Maybe sooner, given how information is so easily accessible these days and how many religious myths will be even more difficult to believe and accept as truth.
Moreover, I have a sense the more the LDS church holds to its 1940 look and feel, the less it will seem mainstream in the future.
Could be wrong though... :-)
Who knows. I know the Church projects about 65 million members in 80 or so years and plans for that.
But not all organizations decline. The Catholic Church seems to thrive. Islam is certainly not on the declined. Even the LDS Church is still growing. If it is a bell curve for the Church and it really has hit its peak then it would not be growing at all.
Well one thing is for sure, none of us will be here in 80 years to see.
Bummer.