Many, Many "Dimes" of DCP's "Paycheck" Came from Mopologetics: Explosive New Admissions on "SeN"

[Bought Yahoo]

Midgley is a great man.

That’s exactly what Gina Colvin and Gemli said.

We all have enemies.

[Fence Sitter]

We all have enemies.

Midgley enjoys his more than most.

[Dr LOD]

It’s an odd twist on the Faustian bargain. Sure, to give up on great worldly riches for the promise of eternal life, sounds moral and all. And who cares if BYU pays for it? BYU exists to serve the glory of God, right?

But that’s all just a straw man anyway because no one goes into academics for great riches. So what’s really being traded for what? I think it’s Faustian after all. In exchange for another year of employment, and the praise of a few ecclesiastical leaders, the Mopologist jettisons that which is most prized among peers: academic integrity.

I had such a conversation about academics and mopologetics with a couple of the current Maxwell people. Specifically why would one have the need to sacrifice their academic integrity to defend or follow the gospel. It went around and around, with them finally settling on the current Givens model of "Brickolage" type of thinking.

[Bought Yahoo]

\onversation about academics and mopologetics with a couple of the current Maxwell people. Specifically why would one have the need to sacrifice their academic integrity to defend or follow the gospel. It went around and around, with them finally settling on the current Givens model of "Brickolage" type of thinking.

I used to think that and then I read some of Dr. Michael Coe's attacks on his fellow Mesoamericanists. Some, but not many or all, academics think it is bloodsport to tear associates and collegues apart.

[Bought Yahoo]

We all have enemies.

Midgley enjoys his more than most.

Remember, Dr. Midgley was kicked out of BYU for being a communist. He's used to the betrayal of mean-spirited collegues.

As to his feud with Gemli, I've never heard of this person, but it seems to me that internet anonymous posters, alive or dead, are open game for ridicule.

[Everybody Wang Chung]

As to his feud with Gemli, I've never heard of this person, but it seems to me that internet anonymous posters, alive or dead, are open game for ridicule.

I'm just glad that "Bought Yahoo" is your real name and not pseudonymous.

[Fence Sitter]

Remember, Dr. Midgley was kicked out of BYU for being a communist. He's used to the betrayal of mean-spirited collegues.

I don't remember Midgley being kicked out of BYU for the Wilkinson affair and Midgley is used to fighting with people. He enjoys it. I have observed it first hand.

As to his feud with Gemli, I've never heard of this person, but it seems to me that internet anonymous posters, alive or dead, are open game for ridicule.

Says someone posting under an anonymous name.

[Dr Moore]

I had such a conversation about academics and mopologetics with a couple of the current Maxwell people. Specifically why would one have the need to sacrifice their academic integrity to defend or follow the gospel. It went around and around, with them finally settling on the current Givens model of "Brickolage" type of thinking.

Right, that's where BYU's brightest minds have found equilibrium between placating the faith-narrative without totally bludgeoning academic credibility.

If this bricolage is such an "ah hah" discovery, and it sure seems to be an important ledge on the cliff, then why do proponents of the idea hide it in arcane books and papers that members will never read? I guarantee that dog won't hunt in Sunday School. Why isn't this "dynamic blending" theory promoted by a single member of the Q15, in youth F2F firesides, or other venues where we could just clear the air once and for all? It seems to me that if bricolage is not the go-to answer for questioning members, that's a sign that no one up top really believes it. More like it's a nifty tool to patronize stubborn questioners when other gaslighting techniques fail.

[Dr Exiled]

I had such a conversation about academics and mopologetics with a couple of the current Maxwell people. Specifically why would one have the need to sacrifice their academic integrity to defend or follow the gospel. It went around and around, with them finally settling on the current Givens model of "Brickolage" type of thinking.

Right, that's where BYU's brightest minds have found equilibrium between placating the faith-narrative without totally bludgeoning academic credibility.

If this bricolage is such an "ah hah" discovery, and it sure seems to be an important ledge on the cliff, then why do proponents of the idea hide it in arcane books and papers that members will never read? I guarantee that dog won't hunt in Sunday School. Why isn't this "dynamic blending" theory promoted by a single member of the Q15, in youth F2F firesides, or other venues where we could just clear the air once and for all? It seems to me that if bricolage is not the go-to answer for questioning members, that's a sign that no one up top really believes it. More like it's a nifty tool to patronize stubborn questioners when other gaslighting techniques fail.

I think bricolage means less tithing and that's probably why the brethren at the top shy away from it, signalling the less thans to follow. There is more force to the call to sacrifice the more real the claims are and bricolage is an admission that everything Joseph Smith claimed just wasn't so. Some will react harshly to smaller "t" truth and leave resulting in less tithing. Also, perhaps, bricolage is still being beta tested and so adoption is awaiting further light and knowledge from the project managers? This is my guess anyway.

[Dr Moore]

...perhaps, bricolage is still being beta tested and so adoption is awaiting further light and knowledge from the project managers?

God, beta testing eternal truth since 1830