Toward a Theory of Mopologetics

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Re:

Post by _Kishkumen »

Daniel Peterson wrote:If you model your posts on those of Pokatator -- study the one above, very carefully -- you will shortly be contributing substance, evidence, analysis, and fresh air by the bucketload, just as Pokatator does, with each post a unique and original gem, just like his.


Unlike your participation here, which no doubt has been extremely illuminating. I know I have learned a lot from you already.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: Toward a Theory of Mopologetics

Post by _Trevor »

Mister Scratch wrote:Ah, okay. But I am still a trifle bit confused. What "mysteries" do you have in mind? LGT? Lamanite DNA? "Some things that are true aren't very useful"? Also, which apologist(s) are you thinking of who might fit the bill?


Oh. Sorry, Scratch. I was referring to "mysteries" such as, "who is the Holy Ghost?", "How exactly does Adam-God work?", mostly the "deep doctrine" stuff that members of the Church aren't supposed to worry about or bring up in Gospel Doctrine class. When I was younger, these kinds of issues were classified as the mysteries of the Gospel.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Re:

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

Kishkumen wrote:I know I have learned a lot from you already.

You're welcome. The pickings here are admittedly more than a bit slim, but, to mix metaphors, I'm gratified to serve as the tallest mountain in Kansas.

Have the other elements of the Kishkumen/Gadianton/Scratch Tri-Unity profited equally well?
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Re:

Post by _Kishkumen »

Daniel Peterson wrote:The pickings here are admittedly more than a bit slim, but, to mix metaphors, I'm gratified to serve as the tallest mountain in Kansas.


Whatever slakes your thirst for entertainment, I suppose.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Re: Toward a Theory of Mopologetics

Post by _Mister Scratch »

Trevor wrote:
Mister Scratch wrote:Ah, okay. But I am still a trifle bit confused. What "mysteries" do you have in mind? LGT? Lamanite DNA? "Some things that are true aren't very useful"? Also, which apologist(s) are you thinking of who might fit the bill?


Oh. Sorry, Scratch. I was referring to "mysteries" such as, "who is the Holy Ghost?", "How exactly does Adam-God work?", mostly the "deep doctrine" stuff that members of the Church aren't supposed to worry about or bring up in Gospel Doctrine class. When I was younger, these kinds of issues were classified as the mysteries of the Gospel.


Ah, okay. In that case, how do you see investigation of these mysteries as leading to apologetics? Also, which apologist (if any) do you see this applying to? Rommelator, perhaps?
_Gadianton
_Emeritus
Posts: 9947
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am

Re: Toward a Theory of Mopologetics

Post by _Gadianton »

Trevor,

I'm also interested in your student of the mysteries. I, Trevor, was once a student of the mysteries. That may shock you, but it is true. At any rate, I'd like to throw my two bits on the connection between the student of the mysteries and the apologist. The two are definitely at odds in many cases. Note how the apologists have bragged about the "trouncing" Lou Midgley gave to Chapel Mormon and student of the mysteries extraordinaire W. Cleon Skousen. I for one, believe the apologists are embarrassed by the "mysteries". Yet, all of them no doubt in their younger years leaned in this direction. Perhaps apologetics is a redirection of the energy and wonder of the student of the mysteries. Rather than tackling the location of the Lost Ten Tribes, the apologists go after intractable problems such as whether Mormon was involved in a military transfer. Apologetics, in this sense attempts to legitimize the curiosity, fascination with the arcane, and penchant for undisciplined wild-eyed speculation that has nothing to do with reality which defines the student of the mysteries.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
_Mister Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm

Re: Toward a Theory of Mopologetics

Post by _Mister Scratch »

Gadianton wrote:Trevor,

I'm also interested in your student of the mysteries. I, Trevor, was once a student of the mysteries. That may shock you, but it is true. At any rate, I'd like to throw my two bits on the connection between the student of the mysteries and the apologist. The two are definitely at odds in many cases. Note how the apologists have bragged about the "trouncing" Lou Midgley gave to Chapel Mormon and student of the mysteries extraordinaire W. Cleon Skousen. I for one, believe the apologists are embarrassed by the "mysteries". Yet, all of them no doubt in their younger years leaned in this direction. Perhaps apologetics is a redirection of the energy and wonder of the student of the mysteries. Rather than tackling the location of the Lost Ten Tribes, the apologists go after intractable problems such as whether Mormon was involved in a military transfer. Apologetics, in this sense attempts to legitimize the curiosity, fascination with the arcane, and penchant for undisciplined wild-eyed speculation that has nothing to do with reality which defines the student of the mysteries.


Yes, I think I agree with this. "Student of the mysteries" really seems to describe a Mopologist in a nascent state of development. That said, I wonder if the impulse described in Trevor's musings can really be fully connected to apologetics per se. "Apologetics," as DCP and others are wont to remind us, merely refers to the *defense* of something. What Trevor is describing, though, is a more scholarly and inquisitive sort of pursuit, and although Mopologetics can sometimes seem sort of "scholary" (I'm sure that the reviewers of Quinn's books had to do a lot of work to collect all that clandestine gossip), it is ultimately more about defensiveness, smearing, and vicious verbal parrying. Thus, I doubt very much that any of the senior Mopologists is a "student of the mysteries" in the way that Trevor has outlined.

This is why I mentioned Rommelator in an earlier post. I suspect that the Young Man Carbuncular, a.k.a. Rommelator, is just moving out of his "student of the mysteries" stage. One can sense a certain bitterness in his posts---a certain desire to lash out and take revenge on all of the critics. I wonder, too, if LoaP had once been a "student of the mysteries," though, obviously, LoaP served a mission and got addicted to "bashing" which renders him a Perpetual Missionary type of Mopologist.
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Toward a Theory of Mopologetics

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

Whenever I dip into Scratch's writing about me, it seems that I'm experiencing déjà vu all over again. Or Nietzsche's ewige Wiederkunft.

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

But the sublime should be kept distinct from the ridiculous. So never mind.

Back to your regular programming.
_Mercury
_Emeritus
Posts: 5545
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 2:14 pm

Re: Toward a Theory of Mopologetics

Post by _Mercury »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
But the sublime should be kept distinct from the ridiculous. So never mind.



Then how do you explain your papers in FARMS publications?
And crawling on the planet's face
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time
And lost in space...and meaning
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Toward a Theory of Mopologetics

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

Mercury wrote:
Daniel Peterson wrote:But the sublime should be kept distinct from the ridiculous. So never mind.

Then how do you explain your papers in FARMS publications?

I'm afraid I don't see the problem. Many of my papers appear in FARMS publications. That's the sublime. But where's the ridiculous? I said nothing about MDB.
Post Reply