Breatharianism and LDS testimony
Posted: Sat Sep 09, 2023 3:16 am
It's amazing how many things are out there in the world that I've never heard of. I watched a documentary last night on "Breatharianism". I don't recall ever hearing about this "practice" until running across that documentary recommendation. In its contemporary incarnation, Breatharianists are people who do not eat anything, and live on sunlight and/or the energy of the universe. Now, there was a movie that came out a couple of years ago called The Wonder, which was actually very good, and the idea is the same: a young girl persists for weeks and months without food and touted as a miracle by the local church.
Yes, I did see that movie, but it's not like I rushed to the Internet afterward to look up the practice of sustaining oneself without food because it seemed like something that was probably fiction, and if not, an isolated incident in the 16th century because sure, Trump supporters, for instance, are stupid, but not that stupid, right?
wrong. As it turns out, Breatharianism is thriving now with a bevy of gurus and high-priced retreats for stupid people looking for answers. And it has an illustrious history over the last few decades.
A notable figure discussed in the link above is Jasmuheen, a white Australian woman and psychopath (like Joseph Smith) who wrote a book on par with Mary Baker Eddy's Science and Health, called Living on Light. The crux of the book is how to survive your first 21 days with no food and water. Yep. At least 3 people who read the book and tried it died. Jasmuheen's response? Complete indifference, and you may have heard this one before: They weren't pure enough or sincere enough. Basically, the Mormon answers for why a person doesn't get confirmation for the Book of Mormon is the same logic as why a person can't go their first 21 days without food. Jasmuheen goes months without food, others have gone years and decades.
The movement has had its scandals, as several gurus have been caught red-handed eating. Yes, this is where we're at as a species unfortunately, as it should be, several gurus have been caught living for more than 10 days. Jasmuheen takes videos of herself and its no secret her home contains a well-stocked fridge -- for other people living there. Sixty Minutes and others have put these gurus to the test, and when they basically fail after just a few days, the response is things like, "the air in the test environment wasn't pure enough". But it's an insane negotiation, because they are already going for stretches of months and years with no problem, and so all the setup and deliberation for a mere week proves the fraud long before the test even begins.
So how does this relate to the Mormon testimony? I've mentioned some parallels already, and there are many obvious connections. But I do have something specific in mind. I've long been at odds with not only believers, but my fellow unbelievers for my position that testimony is a willful and knowing fabrication. With rare exception, people are lying about their testimonies. TBMs claim that testimony is an overpowering manifestation of the Holy Ghost. Skeptics tend to believe testimony is a powerful manifestation also, but it's one with natural causes like DMT and an emotionally charged crowd or another high pressure situation. I don't claim this is never the case, but the vast majority of testimony is fabrication, in my view.
Breatharianism seems to back my belief up. And that's because, there are many things you might in theory become confused about, but whether or not you've eaten in the last year isn't one of them. And so if you're claiming to live on sunlight and not eat food or drink water for more than a couple days at a time, you're a filthy liar, and you know it.
Pacing the Mormon testimony dilemma are the dupes trying to live on sunlight. You have the sociopaths like Joseph Smith who outright lie with no conscious and gain the interest of stupid and broken people looking for answers. From there, the choices are you try it sincerely and you fail. In the case of Breatharinism, failure is death. That's the only option, you go without food and by day 21 you are dead and the funeral is over. The closest parallel are those who admit they didn't get an answer or don't join or drop out, to the jeering of their friends and leaders who insist it's their own fault.
Then there are those who catch the "Rudy Giuliani wink" (it was stolen, wink wink!) and learn to lie themselves -- to say they aren't eating when in fact, they are eating. These people aren't sociopaths at all, they are relatively normal people who succumb to peer pressure. These are the great number of LDS who get up and bear testimony without a shadow of doubt and allude to an experience that confirms everything 100%. For some it was easy, for others it takes a long time, but none of them would have done it without peer pressure -- they wouldn't have invented the fraud themselves in a million years. And then there are those who believe, who are captivated by the idea, but struggle and are forever unsure of themselves. They pay for the retreats and believe those around them who are lying but they are honest, and can't bring themselves to actually say they aren't eating if they are. Similar to folks like my mom: everyone who knew her would say she was the best living example of the Mormon faith that they've ever known. But she didn't run to the podium to bear testimony, and she told me more than once that she never received the burning in the bosom and she always felt a little less about her faith because she'd been denied the supernatural confirmation that so many others receive.
I realize I've gone on a while, but a final important point. Sure, while in Breatharianism there are no false positives, in Mormon testimony I grant a few false positives. People who have had real experiences --- overpowering emotional flow right after reading and prayer etc. But here's the thing. If communities can arise so easily on obvious lies where false positives simply are not possible, and the faith can't be anything other than a lie, then that tells me the social organizing force of a sociopathic charismatic leader hitched to a cornucopia of desperate followers who bring each other in line via peer pressure is a far more powerful force than mass hypnosis. And so those real experiences are the exception and not the rule, in religions where false positives are possible, like Mormonism.
Yes, I did see that movie, but it's not like I rushed to the Internet afterward to look up the practice of sustaining oneself without food because it seemed like something that was probably fiction, and if not, an isolated incident in the 16th century because sure, Trump supporters, for instance, are stupid, but not that stupid, right?
wrong. As it turns out, Breatharianism is thriving now with a bevy of gurus and high-priced retreats for stupid people looking for answers. And it has an illustrious history over the last few decades.
A notable figure discussed in the link above is Jasmuheen, a white Australian woman and psychopath (like Joseph Smith) who wrote a book on par with Mary Baker Eddy's Science and Health, called Living on Light. The crux of the book is how to survive your first 21 days with no food and water. Yep. At least 3 people who read the book and tried it died. Jasmuheen's response? Complete indifference, and you may have heard this one before: They weren't pure enough or sincere enough. Basically, the Mormon answers for why a person doesn't get confirmation for the Book of Mormon is the same logic as why a person can't go their first 21 days without food. Jasmuheen goes months without food, others have gone years and decades.
The movement has had its scandals, as several gurus have been caught red-handed eating. Yes, this is where we're at as a species unfortunately, as it should be, several gurus have been caught living for more than 10 days. Jasmuheen takes videos of herself and its no secret her home contains a well-stocked fridge -- for other people living there. Sixty Minutes and others have put these gurus to the test, and when they basically fail after just a few days, the response is things like, "the air in the test environment wasn't pure enough". But it's an insane negotiation, because they are already going for stretches of months and years with no problem, and so all the setup and deliberation for a mere week proves the fraud long before the test even begins.
So how does this relate to the Mormon testimony? I've mentioned some parallels already, and there are many obvious connections. But I do have something specific in mind. I've long been at odds with not only believers, but my fellow unbelievers for my position that testimony is a willful and knowing fabrication. With rare exception, people are lying about their testimonies. TBMs claim that testimony is an overpowering manifestation of the Holy Ghost. Skeptics tend to believe testimony is a powerful manifestation also, but it's one with natural causes like DMT and an emotionally charged crowd or another high pressure situation. I don't claim this is never the case, but the vast majority of testimony is fabrication, in my view.
Breatharianism seems to back my belief up. And that's because, there are many things you might in theory become confused about, but whether or not you've eaten in the last year isn't one of them. And so if you're claiming to live on sunlight and not eat food or drink water for more than a couple days at a time, you're a filthy liar, and you know it.
Pacing the Mormon testimony dilemma are the dupes trying to live on sunlight. You have the sociopaths like Joseph Smith who outright lie with no conscious and gain the interest of stupid and broken people looking for answers. From there, the choices are you try it sincerely and you fail. In the case of Breatharinism, failure is death. That's the only option, you go without food and by day 21 you are dead and the funeral is over. The closest parallel are those who admit they didn't get an answer or don't join or drop out, to the jeering of their friends and leaders who insist it's their own fault.
Then there are those who catch the "Rudy Giuliani wink" (it was stolen, wink wink!) and learn to lie themselves -- to say they aren't eating when in fact, they are eating. These people aren't sociopaths at all, they are relatively normal people who succumb to peer pressure. These are the great number of LDS who get up and bear testimony without a shadow of doubt and allude to an experience that confirms everything 100%. For some it was easy, for others it takes a long time, but none of them would have done it without peer pressure -- they wouldn't have invented the fraud themselves in a million years. And then there are those who believe, who are captivated by the idea, but struggle and are forever unsure of themselves. They pay for the retreats and believe those around them who are lying but they are honest, and can't bring themselves to actually say they aren't eating if they are. Similar to folks like my mom: everyone who knew her would say she was the best living example of the Mormon faith that they've ever known. But she didn't run to the podium to bear testimony, and she told me more than once that she never received the burning in the bosom and she always felt a little less about her faith because she'd been denied the supernatural confirmation that so many others receive.
I realize I've gone on a while, but a final important point. Sure, while in Breatharianism there are no false positives, in Mormon testimony I grant a few false positives. People who have had real experiences --- overpowering emotional flow right after reading and prayer etc. But here's the thing. If communities can arise so easily on obvious lies where false positives simply are not possible, and the faith can't be anything other than a lie, then that tells me the social organizing force of a sociopathic charismatic leader hitched to a cornucopia of desperate followers who bring each other in line via peer pressure is a far more powerful force than mass hypnosis. And so those real experiences are the exception and not the rule, in religions where false positives are possible, like Mormonism.
Thank you for your thoughts. Anyone else have ideas about this? I think my Backyard Professor Live program tomorrow night will discuss this, and to Gd I will give the credit for calling my attention to it. All other ideas and investigations please share here and I will mention as much as I can. The parallels to Joseph Smith are obvious, and it opens a crack in the door a little wider to begin seeing the issue, This appears to me to be quite important discussion when it comes to Mormon testimony.