SMPT in Claremont in Less Than Two Weeks

[_Daniel Peterson]

LOAP submitted a very good proposal. A blind review process accepted it for presentation. That's how the thing worked. And LOAP's actual paper, when it was presented in Claremont, justified the decision to accept it. David Paulsen, perhaps the dean of currently active Mormon philosophers of religion, was the commentator, and his compliments to LOAP were extended and glowing.

There were a number of students who presented at the meetings in Claremont. And they did well.

[_Trevor]

Congratulations to Daniel, Chris, and Blair for a successful SMPT conference. It sounds like it was a very intellectually stimulating meeting.

[_Bond James Bond]

I thought it was a running gag along the lines of Cassius University.

Wha? Ah...damn.

[_Ray A]

As a matter of fact, though, the Foundation for Interreligious Diplomacy, on whose small board I sit,

Interesting organisation: Foundation for Interreligious Diplomacy.

By the term “trustworthy opponents,” we mean two or more people who care about and trust each other but who disagree about very important matters in their lives that cannot be resolved by compromise. They are drawn together to persuade each other to change for the better because they care about each other's wellbeing. Unlike enemies that desire to eliminate each other, trustworthy opponents want each other to thrive and they honor each other's freedom of conscience to ultimately decide how best to live. Yet that very mutual care and honor compels them to engage in a forthright contest of persuasion. They wrestle in mutual integrity for love of the truth and each other. By engaging their differences they serve each other and their communities to clarify, refine, and expand their truth in comparison with others'. Though conflicting in worldview, temperament, vision for the future, and/or many other ways, yet they respect and trust each other's competence and good will. Trustworthy opponents provide models of practical hope for peaceful tension in our world of diverse worldviews.

Board of Directors.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Congratulations to Daniel, Chris, and Blair for a successful SMPT conference. It sounds like it was a very intellectually stimulating meeting.

It was, in my opinion.

In some ways, in fact, I think it was our most successful conference yet. The presentations that I heard -- and I heard almost all of them -- were without exception thought-provoking and worthwhile.



.

[_Doctor Scratch]

But given the hightened information pumping antics of LoaP in PMs and calling me out on the forum to try and make me look like a fool and blacken my character, I just can't risk some of these guys figuring out who I am in real life. So that's why I can't accept the offer right now for next year.

.

Wow! This is a startling revelation! I had been under the impression that LoaP was going to be ending his participation here, and then we come to learn that he was conducting an aggressive interrogation campaign against you moderator edit by harmony: rule #3. I wonder: is LoaP among the apologists who support LDS-developed methods of torture and interrogation?

[_LifeOnaPlate]

I wonder: is LoaP among the apologists who support LDS-developed methods of torture and interrogation?

No, and I wouldn't call them "LDS-developed," either.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

If what Scratch says in chat is true, Gad's claim to be presenting was always a "joke." In that regard, I must clarify my claim that he lied, because I cannot absolutely prove his intent.

However, it should be noted that there were many here like me who thought Gad was making a factual claim, not a joke. Thus we were all misled by Gad's attempt at a joke, which we took serious. When I asked Gad directly for confirmation as to whether he was joking or not,moderator edit by harmony: rule #3.

To recap: Gad was "joking," though he made several here believe he was serious. For what purpose I do not know.

[_Gadianton]

To recap: Gad was "joking," though he made several here believe he was serious. For what purpose I do not know.

So says you. I deny it. My presentation was real. It turns out, rather ironically, that DCPs presentation may have been a "put-on" according to his recent comments in this thread.

[_Daniel Peterson]

So says you. I deny it. My presentation was real. It turns out, rather ironically, that DCPs presentation may have been a "put-on" according to his recent comments in this thread.

This is a silly game.

Gadianton didn't present in Claremont.

Nothing he says can be taken at face value.

I think he's spoofing Scratch, with his over-the-top endorsements of Scratch's every bit of nonsense and his own absurd ventures into Scratchoscopy, but I can't be certain of that. And I don't care enough to pay significant attention any more.