Doctor Steuss wrote:To me, the “ideal critic” (not just of my religious views, but of my literary, musical, and/or other views as well) is someone who knows their junk, genuinely want to know my views as much as I want to know theirs, and makes me think… it’s not the tallest order to fulfill, but that’s what I like. A few examples (not by any means a complete list) from MA&D would be Rhinomelon, CaliforniaKid, CKSalmon, Don Bradley, The Dude, and Tarski.
Stu,
Thanks for the "critical acclaim"!
Don
You're welcome, although it came at a price. I now have a file being maintained by the SCMC.
Drats!
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski
moksha wrote:Ah, smitten by Sister or Lady Blixa's charms. Would she be willing to relocate to Colorado City?
I think you mean Tibet. I don't think Colorado City accepts the two-husbands arrangement. Nor is it an idea that appeals to me, Nauvoo precedent notwithstanding.
I'm satisfied to stand in awe of her charms as she deigns to reveal them--and pester her for "referrals." :-P
JRG39402 wrote:What would the ideal critic of the LDSchurch look like?
From whose point of view?
From the LDS apologetic side: It's a Evangelical Christian who's critiques are based on the differences between Mormonism and Mainstream Christianity. The EV view that LDS are "going to hell" or "following a false prophet" or whatever are easily dismissable by showing that Christianity has quite a few supernatural holes itself that can be exploited. By attacking the Christian arguments/sources/story Mormonism can triumph. Totally full of crap....but silently think they're not full of crap because they're in the One True Toilet.
From the Christian critic side: The critic has to be Christian and preferably Evangelical and in agreement with whatever a Christian critic choices to focus on. They'll talk about the lack of evidence for Mormonism while sidestepping the lack of evidence for many Biblical things. Totally full of crap....but enjoy crapping on the Mormons loudly, often while holding signs so as not to be total hypocrappers.
From the secular critic side: It's a secular critic who bases their criticisms in reason/critical thinking and thinks all (or most) of the religious stuff is a tad crazy. These guys are usually dismissed as godless heathens by both the EVs and the Mormons. End up shaking their heads at all the crap the above are full of while thinking their crap doesn't stink because they don't believe in the Invisible Crap Fairy.
Basically, we're all full of crap. I admit it....how bout anyone else?
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
The critic is usually a lowly individual with some sort of baggage. Always trying to one up other people he will target churches and government agencies and taunt policy with his limited intelligence gained from books at Barnes & Nobles.
Seemingly innocent this persons ego is so large no amount of worship will ever quench his thirst for approval in the name of sarcasm and criticism of others.
People go to church because they aren't able to lead their lives without someone holding their hand, the critic depends on their angst of his remarks to feel satiated and good about himself. A symbiotic link in a sense.
The real tragedy is that the critic will live out his life in a basement stewing over others, when his talents could be used elsewhere. I suppose this would be a good time to mention "free agency".
fickleflame wrote:The critic is usually a lowly individual with some sort of baggage. Always trying to one up other people he will target churches and government agencies and taunt policy with his limited intelligence gained from books at Barnes & Nobles.
Seemingly innocent this persons ego is so large no amount of worship will ever quench his thirst for approval in the name of sarcasm and criticism of others.
People go to church because they aren't able to lead their lives without someone holding their hand, the critic depends on their angst of his remarks to feel satiated and good about himself. A symbiotic link in a sense.
The real tragedy is that the critic will live out his life in a basement stewing over others, when his talents could be used elsewhere. I suppose this would be a good time to mention "free agency".
fickleflame wrote:The critic is usually a lowly individual with some sort of baggage. Always trying to one up other people he will target churches and government agencies and taunt policy with his limited intelligence gained from books at Barnes & Nobles.
Seemingly innocent this persons ego is so large no amount of worship will ever quench his thirst for approval in the name of sarcasm and criticism of others.
People go to church because they aren't able to lead their lives without someone holding their hand, the critic depends on their angst of his remarks to feel satiated and good about himself. A symbiotic link in a sense.
The real tragedy is that the critic will live out his life in a basement stewing over others, when his talents could be used elsewhere. I suppose this would be a good time to mention "free agency".
Let's see.
You look down on "People who go to church".
You look down on those who criticise their motives for doing so.
You look down on people who "live out [their] life in a basement stewing over others, when [their] talents could be used elsewhere".
Forchrissake, you even look down on people who buy books from Barnes and Noble.
You must be an incredibly talented and really important person (who knows a lot about bookshops too). Thanks for dropping by! Please post as often as you like.
fickleflame wrote:The critic is usually a lowly individual with some sort of baggage. Always trying to one up other people he will target churches and government agencies and taunt policy with his limited intelligence gained from books at Barnes & Nobles.
Seemingly innocent this persons ego is so large no amount of worship will ever quench his thirst for approval in the name of sarcasm and criticism of others.
People go to church because they aren't able to lead their lives without someone holding their hand, the critic depends on their angst of his remarks to feel satiated and good about himself. A symbiotic link in a sense.
The real tragedy is that the critic will live out his life in a basement stewing over others, when his talents could be used elsewhere. I suppose this would be a good time to mention "free agency".
Well, now we know what a critic of critics would look like. Very pleasant.
WK: "Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas"
Will Schryver: "No, he didn’t." 3/19/08
Still waiting for Will to back this up...
fickleflame wrote:The critic is usually a lowly individual with some sort of baggage. Always trying to one up other people he will target churches and government agencies and taunt policy with his limited intelligence gained from books at Barnes & Nobles. [...]
What's wrong with B&N?
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski