DiscussMormonism.com

Charity has stated or implied on several occasions that we apostates or Mormon skeptics are closed minded. To me, being closed minded implies an unwillingness (or inability) to consider arguments or evidence contrary to one’s positions (by consider, I mean to make a “good faith” effort to consider), to consider the possibility that one is mistaken, etc. Contrary to Charity's claim, I see substantial evidence, using this definition, that us apostates are instead quite open-minded, at least where it comes to this specific topc. At the same time, I see little evidence that the same is true of the apologists, many who make no effort to hide their close-mindedness by proclaiming that they have started their inquiry into these issues with their minds already made up. That we apostates have, in fact, changed our minds where it comes to Mormonism and religion is prima facie evidence of open mindedness on these particular questions.

All this said, one might be closed-minded in some areas but open-minded in others. Take my wife, for example, she is wonderfully open-minded on most issues, but terribly closed-minded on her religious beliefs—she refuses to even listen to counterarguments or evidence. On balance, I’d say that she’s pretty open-mined, except, sadly, for this one particular issue. The point being that it is not necessarily a simple construct, despite Charity’s uninformed assertions to the contrary.

Now, how to determine whether one is closed-minded or open-minded? Hard to say. The fact that someone shows changes her views over time is one indication—nobody is right on every topic, and a propensity to change one’s mind might be evidence that the person is open to other ideas, arguments, evidence, etc. (It may also imply the person is “wishy washy,” or something like that.) That said, the fact that one does not change her mind on particular issue does not necessarily imply she is closed minded—she might have very good reasons to hold fast on the issue; say the evidence overwhelmingly backs her position. On the other hand, the fact that someone rarely changes his mind on anything is probably pretty good evidence that he is closed-minded; as I’ve said, no one is right on everything.

At the same time, we might reasonably judge that someone who refuses to alter her position on an issue in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence is probably closed minded on that issue (though not necessarily).

Now, with all the being said, I am curious as to which issues those of us here have changed our minds. I’ll start with an abbreviated list off the top of my head. (You’ll note a trend. I’ve become much more socially liberal in the last decade or so.)

Before-Mormon Church true
After-Mormon Church not true (I’ve pretty well changed my mind with everything to do with Mormonism, and I was a devout believer for around 35 years)
Before-God real
After-God not real
Before-Pro private school voucher
After-Oppose private school voucher
Before-Homosexuality a sin
After-Homsexuality not a sin, nothing sinful about sex between consenting and informed adults
Before-Anti same sex marriage
After-Pro same sex marriage
Before-Pro capital punishment
After-Anti capital punishment
Before-Anti abortion, supported making it illegal
After-Still morally opposed to abortion, but conclude issue more morally complex-prefer now not to make illegal but to work to reduce need via sex ed, provision of contraceptives, pro-adoption policies, etc. (I still oppose late-term abortions and partial birth abortions)
Before-no way legalize drugs
After-war on drugs costly failure, should consider legalization
Before-support Iraq war
After-oppose Iraq war
Before-sex outside marriage wrong
After-sex between consenting adults a matter between them, none of my business, and not a “sin” (with exception adultery)
Before-Adultery wrong
After-Adultery still wrong (just to show I’m not a moral reprobate, though I think there are mitigating circumstances that alter how we perceive it)

guy sajer wrote: ... Take my wife, for example, she is wonderfully open-minded on most issues, but terribly closed-minded on her religious beliefs—she refuses to even listen to counterarguments or evidence. On balance, I’d say that she’s pretty open-mined, except, sadly, for this one particular issue. ...

Unfortunately, I'm walking in similar shoes.
As a nevermo, I have no before-after list but could write another : younger-older.

Hi Guy...

Funny....

Some might suggest your list proves your expanded care for others, your deeper concern for life, your enlightened perspective of our humanness.

Others might see this list and suggest you have been influenced by Satan, bought into his temptations, and moved away from righteousness.

Open mindedness can mean one allows Satan to enter, (under some belief systems), so perhaps being closed minded in an appropiate way to manage for some believers.

And... maybe believers see you not so much as having an open mind but allowing Satan to influence you?

But, if Satan can influence you then at the very least you had an open enough mind to allow some alternative ideas. :-)

I think if one is trying to retain a testimony, (of anything), the more closed minded the better. in my opinion, so long as a person does not allow for the possibility for the church to NOT be true, then are not open to an alternative.

~dancer~

Here's what Thomas Monson said about open-mindedness:

Should doubt knock at your doorway, just say to those skeptical, disturbing, rebellious thoughts: “I propose to stay with my faith, with the faith of my people. I know that happiness and contentment are there, and I forbid you, agnostic, doubting thoughts, to destroy the house of my faith. I acknowledge that I do not understand the processes of creation, but I accept the fact of it. I grant that I cannot explain the miracles of the Bible, and I do not attempt to do so, but I accept God’s word. I wasn’t with Joseph, but I believe him. My faith did not come to me through science, and I will not permit so-called science to destroy it.”

Greetings Guy:

WOW! I was going to write a post about this. I too have been noticing somethings and the first thing that went out to the trash was the gay marriage thing - for some reason it just did'New Testament matter. The experience that I am having now is that it's like peeling an onion by hand and taking off why little layer at a time - the onion is also the size of a basketball. It's a process to get where you are but it is also a dedication to truth.

regards,

thestyleguy

I am sure the concept that people can be more open minded about some things than others is correct. I suppose most spouses would hope that love and devotion and committment to marriage were on the less open minded side of the spectrum. I think of love and devotion and committment to God in the same way.

I would no more keep an "open mind" about God than I do about my husband and children.

With me the gay issue baggage was the first to go. I feel I've been open minded in my journey. Changing my mind on gay issues came from much pondering as well as discussing certain points with gay individuals. Instead of just regurgitating things I'd heard in church I tried to decide on my own. At this point I find things which bring harm to be unethical. This is how I came to believe that wide-spread generalizations about gay individuals are unethical (as well as denying basic civil rights) and being gay is not unethical. Consentual sex - not unethical. Adultery - unethical. Things like that.

I do feel I'm open minded and do reserve the right to change my mind about anything upon further information. I do not find apologist arguments to be persuasive in this regard. It's not that I don't ponder them, it's that they are too much, too reaching for me to take seriously.

I had an engagement break up because my fiance was in love with another woman. He was seeing her regularly. Our conversations went somewhat like - My roommate saw you with Betty at the Wilkinson Center. Him - That wasn't Betty. Does your roommate think all Latino women look alike? Can she prove it was Betty? Me - you said you would call and you didn't call. Him - am I on a timeclock? Can you prove that I understood I was supposed to call you? Why are you so needy?

It was all emotional abuse and skirting the issue and caused the whole situation to drag out much longer than it needed to. I am over it, okay, I am just using this as an example of what I'm reminded of with apologist arguments. If I hear something that does ring of truth and does make simple sense I'll be happy to consider it.

charity wrote:I am sure the concept that people can be more open minded about some things than others is correct. I suppose most spouses would hope that love and devotion and committment to marriage were on the less open minded side of the spectrum. I think of love and devotion and committment to God in the same way.

I would no more keep an "open mind" about God than I do about my husband and children.

What you say is in itself perfectly reasonable. I am sure you would admit, however, that there have been many devoted and (they thought) happily married spouses who discovered to their horror, distress and deep disappointment that their partner was a liar and an adulterer, and that (in the last analysis) their love and trust had been misplaced.

There are people on this board who have been through an experience like that in terms of their belief in Joseph Smith as a prophet, and in some cases in their belief in God.

Say what you like about your own state of commitment - but don't tell these people that they are not 'open-minded' because they are never going to come back to where you still are.

ludwigm wrote:

guy sajer wrote: ... Take my wife, for example, she is wonderfully open-minded on most issues, but terribly closed-minded on her religious beliefs—she refuses to even listen to counterarguments or evidence. On balance, I’d say that she’s pretty open-mined, except, sadly, for this one particular issue. ...

Unfortunately, I'm walking in similar shoes..

Yes, my fox has dug in to her fox hole as well. Yet, we continue to share the same ideals. They've pretty much stayed the same.

She "doesn't know what to think" about the history we've discussed. It disturbes her deeply but her reaction is more to take cover and seek safety within those that are not aware of the history.

But HOW are people supposed to know if they are being deceived? I am very devoted to my husband but a certain amount of evidence would convince me that he was having an affair - despite his arguments that he wasn't. People that have gotten themselves in false religions - how are they supposed to know they are being deceived and that the feelings they feel are not from God?