Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
DrStakhanovite
Elder
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:55 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

Post by DrStakhanovite »

Gadianton wrote:
Tue Jun 08, 2021 10:53 pm
As soon as you hit the word "kuhn" in any of his papers you can pack up and go home.
I stopped here:
Kevin Christensen wrote:How does he go about deconstructing Mormonism? Not the way Jacques Derrida would. (Derrida is not listed in the bibliography, a fact that may matter only to those with enough background with the term to wonder about the significance of a title promising to “deconstruct” something.)
I’m sorry but Derrida didn’t coin a neologism, “deconstruction” was in use before Derrida and has a semantic domain that is larger than Derrida’s project. In fact, people use the word in academic titles all over the place and I’ve never seen any commentator perk up and say “I’m confused about why you don’t mention Derrida”

Deconstructing Ontological Vagueness’ by Matti Eklund doesn’t mention or make use of anything related to Derrida. Same for ‘Supervenience Deconstructed’ by John Heil. If they can use the term in such a manner, why can’t Riskas?

Why even bother to point this out?
Image
User avatar
Gadianton
God
Posts: 3843
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 11:56 pm
Location: Elsewhere

Re: Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

Post by Gadianton »

true, not only that, Derrida denied he did any one thing that you could repeat and label as something (even if he did). And certainly, for Derrida, "deconstructing" Mormonism would have nothing to do with refuting Mormonism. In his context "deconstruct" comes from Heidegger "unbuild" -- maybe "reverse engineering" isn't too far off the mark. At any rate, it's something like that verses destroy or refute, or show to be contradictory or grossly unfavorable, as I assume Riskas is doing.
Lem
God
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

Post by Lem »

gemli Kiwi57 • 5 hours ago • edited

Are you aware of the sheer number of conflicting theological ideologies? Do you know why Catholics aren't Mormons, who aren't Baptists, who aren't Jehovah's Witnesses...etc, etc? Are you aware of what they think of your faith? Do you think they simply haven't read the right book?

-----------

Louis Midgley gemli • 2 hours ago • edited

I happen to have published many essays responding to c

http://disq.us/p/2hjlf7t
Can we get a wellness check for the old guy?
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8981
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Louis Midgley > gemli

I doubt that gemli has ever met a Latter-day Saint. Why? gemli has never once in thousands of comments ever once mentioned having done so.
You know. I don’t think he has, either. Not even after posting thousands of times on Sic et Non.

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 5810
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

Post by Moksha »

I want to re-look up that Festschrift article, Louis Midgley: Barking Yorkshire Terrier for the Lord.

Midgley wants Gemli to give him some Mormon names so he can track Gemli down.

Wonder if Gemli was sitting nearby when Elder Cook had his encounter with Mick Jagger?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5017
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

Post by Philo Sofee »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:33 am
Louis Midgley > gemli

I doubt that gemli has ever met a Latter-day Saint. Why? gemli has never once in thousands of comments ever once mentioned having done so.
You know. I don’t think he has, either. Not even after posting thousands of times on Sic et Non.

- Doc
O.U.C.H.!
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5017
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

Post by Philo Sofee »

Moksha
Louis Midgley: Barking Yorkshire Terrier for the Lord.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
DrStakhanovite
Elder
Posts: 336
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:55 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

Post by DrStakhanovite »

Gadianton wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 11:12 pm
true, not only that, Derrida denied he did any one thing that you could repeat and label as something (even if he did). And certainly, for Derrida, "deconstructing" Mormonism would have nothing to do with refuting Mormonism. In his context "deconstruct" comes from Heidegger "unbuild" -- maybe "reverse engineering" isn't too far off the mark. At any rate, it's something like that verses destroy or refute, or show to be contradictory or grossly unfavorable, as I assume Riskas is doing.
Of course you are in the right of it, Dean Robbers. The "literature major" seems to be unaware that using Derrida for Riskas' purposes would be a mistake of intent.


Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Thu Jun 10, 2021 2:33 am
Louis Midgley > gemli

I doubt that gemli has ever met a Latter-day Saint. Why? gemli has never once in thousands of comments ever once mentioned having done so.
You know. I don’t think he has, either. Not even after posting thousands of times on Sic et Non.

- Doc
Image
Image
User avatar
Physics Guy
God
Posts: 1557
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 7:40 am
Location: on the battlefield of life

Re: Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

Post by Physics Guy »

Midgley often seems to imply that if only people would read X,Y, and Z prestigious theologians they would see the errors of their ways and repent in dust and ashes. This attitude of his strikes me as an inadvertent confession of ignorance in itself, I'm afraid: if he imagines those authors having such an effect then he can't have understood them very well himself.

I've never heard any real expert on philosophy or theology strike this kind of "My Dad can beat up your Dad!" pose that Midgley often does.
I was a teenager before it was cool.
Lem
God
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 12:46 am

Re: Midgley continues to re-write (and degrade) gemli’s in real life personal history

Post by Lem »

Physics Guy wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 7:56 am
Without being able to say all that much about Mormonism as it actually is, the "uncanny valley" is the term I was missing for my own impression of Mormonism.

I'm not saying that this perception of mine is necessarily accurate or objective or anything, or that anyone should care about my perception, but for what it's worth it is a fact of my perception that Mormonism seems particularly weird and, well, made up. And I don't just find all religions that way, or all unfamiliar religions. Some flavors of Christianity seem less weird to me because they're familiar, and plenty of other world religions seem foreign to me, because they are, but I have no trouble assuming that they're genuine and authentic and such. Mormonism is in an uncanny valley for me, where it's too close to the Christianity I know to just seem exotic and foreign, but also definitely off in a lot of ways that might well not seem major to a complete outsider but that seem huge to me.

I think it's really exactly the uncanny valley effect, where something is close enough to the familiar for its discrepancies to stand out sharply. And as with those nearly-realistic computer graphics people that look like ghouls, when less realistic cartoons just look cute, Mormonism keeps seeming not just different to me, but disturbingly wrong.

I try not to let that instinctive reaction affect my conscious judgements too much. Maybe this recognition of the uncanny valley effect will help me in compensating for it.
I thought of your 'uncanny valley' comment when I read this description of a recent Gina Colvin project:
Dr. Gina Colvin interviewed Lindsay Hansen Park and they discussed “Ordinary Mormon Trauma,” the lived experience of dealing with institutional contradiction in the church. (Edit: link to interview will be up later today.) She wrote:

Ordinary Mormon trauma is that everyday experience of being in a culture that has never resolved its formative pathologies or repented of its institutional sins. Mormon trauma is passed on from one generation to the next.

Mormon trauma is experienced as death by a thousand cuts, from the way that policy and doctrine is dropped to way we teach and lead, to the way we are with each other and in our families. …

Mormon trauma creates an environment where it is OK to be:

Nice, but not kind

Disciplined but not regulated

Curious but not open

Service oriented but not care oriented

Devout but not holy

Religious but not spiritual

Studied but not thoughtful

Worthy but not good

Confident but not integrated

Gratified but not delighted

Sacrificing but not openhearted

Obedient but not teachable

Repentant but not merciful

Self-absorbed but not self-reflexive

Doctrinal but not theological

Certain but not whole

Dependable but not safe

Accomplished but not formed.

https://old.reddit.com/r/Mormon/comment ... on_trauma/
The list of outward attributes not supported by inward characteristics pretty well defined for me the uncanny valley comparison.
Post Reply