special pleading and discussions about the LDS church

[_Sethbag]

I've known about special pleading for a long time, and references to it pop up from time to time on this board and others, but after seeing a reference to it again I thought I'd look it up on wikipedia and remind myself of all the nuances in the definition of it. What I found amused me greatly, recognizing every single example as it occurs almost daily on these and the MAD boards. I'm going to quote each bullet point in the examples section from the Wikipedia article, but insert my own example instead.

A more difficult case is when a possible criticism is made relatively immune to investigation. This immunity may take the forms of:

* reference to vocabulary that is owned by a distinct community with sole rights to assess meaning and application
Example: Joseph Smith translated the Book of Abraham, but it wasn't in the conventional sense of the world "translation."
Example: The temple ceremony isn't secret - it's sacred. And what's sacred is whatever we say is sacred, for whatever reason we say it's sacred.

* unexplained claims of exemption from principles commonly thought relevant to the subject matter
Example: The Book of Mormon is only provable by faith and spiritual means. The evidence doesn't matter because this is a matter of faith.
Example: While it may be true that Joseph Smith's actions in such and such a case may have been wrong by conventional standards, they were right in this case because God had commanded him to do it.

* claims to data that are inherently unverifiable, perhaps because too remote or impossible to define clearly
Example: Millions of Latter-Day Saints have proven the Book of Mormon is true by praying about it and receiving a confirmation that it is.
Example: I don't know about you, but I know this is true because the Holy Ghost told me.

* assertion that the opponent lacks the qualifications necessary to comprehend a point of view
Example: You can't understand this because you're not worthy, and you reject the Holy Spirit, so God can't tell you that it's true.
Example: You don't really know what the Holy Spirit witness is like. I do, but I can't explain it to you.

* assertion that literally nobody has the qualifications necessary to comprehend a point of view
Example: None of us were there. We can't possibly know what Joseph Smith did, or why he did it. We can't possibly understand the social context of the time to fairly judge Smith, and attempting to do so is just presentism.
Example: Joseph Smith was justified because God told him to. Who are you to tell God what is right or wrong?

[_skippy the dead]

Interesting!

[_The Dude]

* reference to vocabulary that is owned by a distinct community with sole rights to assess meaning and application

Here's my favorite example of Mormon-owned vocabulary, because it is such a crucial argument for LDS:

"Mormonism is true because it's the only one with priesthood authority -- that is, both the Aaronic and Melkezidek priesthoods. Nobody else has this authority. Nobody."

To which I would respond: Yes, that's because Joseph Smith made it up.

Typically the LDS person responds with priesthood-related quotes from the Bible showing that Joseph Smith didn't just "make it up", but this is a retreat to further special pleading. Obviously those Bible passages are interpreted differently by non-LDS faiths who don't make claims about the existence of priesthood authority.

[_Sethbag]

Dude, that reminds me of marketing claims, where a product will tout that it's the only one on the market with CarboxiGenitol(tm)*, which is their trademarked name for some substance. Yeah, of course you're the only product with CarboxiGenitol(tm), because everyone else calls it something else, and you sue them if they try to claim they have CarboxiGenitol(tm).

*made up - any resemblance to any actual trademarked substance name is entirely accidental ;-)

[_beastie]

My favorite is this:

Mesoamerican scholars would never have any interest in the Book of Mormon, despite all the evidence supporting it as an ancient Mesoameircan document, because of its religious origins.

But then, when the pre-eminent Mesoamerican scholar Michael Coe not once, but twice, addressed the topic of the Book of Mormon and its setting in ancient Mesoamerica (his message was, basically, "give it up, for cripe's sake"), he was dismissed because he didn't know enough about Book of Mormon apologia.