My Experience With Daniel Peterson

[_Joey]

I remember when I was in high school and used to get, year after year, that solicitation from "Who's Who in American High Schools" (or something like that).  I'm sure many here remember those letters!!!

They made you feel real popular and important.  Told you how everyone wanted to know about you and your achievements.  Hell, you were it, the best person people knew!!  Just give them some money and they were gonna give you your deserved spotlight!!!

Ah yes, prey upon ones ego and they will always show interest to participate!!!

Still seems to work today!!

[_MCB]

I have no bad feelings about Joseph Smith. He was a product of his dysfunctional environment. And I have always had that attitude. I do have bad feelings towards Mormons who discriminate against people for the various well known reasons. And the less well-known reasons.

I think that Joseph was a likable scoundrel. I have known and liked similar people in my life (I wouldn't lend them money, though). My feelings towards Brigham are less kind. If any evil still exists in the LDS Church, it stems from him.

Agreed. But---- it is all in the past. We can't undo it. We can, however, learn from it.

[_lostindc]

Tons of speculation in your post.

Can you point to a piece of work where DCP is not clear and concise?

I am afraid some individuals do not understand that when a doctrinal or similar question is asked it takes time to research to answer, hence why DCP may appear to be dodging the issues. Judging the way individuals cling to anything he states I can see why he apprehensive to banter on any topic.

Additionally, I am not sure how you know what DCP knows? This just sounds silly.

Lastly, I believe you are wishfully thinking that DCP would fail a polygraph when asked about his belief in the Book of Mormon. Another silly statement. You are losing your audience.

Although I have never met him, I have no doubt that DCP is a likable individual in person.

What bothers me about Dr. Peterson is his extremely annoying habit of dodging the issues on which he knows that neither he, or any other LDS apologist, can prevail.

He seems incapable of understanding (or at least admitting to) the difference between possibility and probability in determining weight of evidence.

His ability (or lack thereof) to think logically and express his ideas and opinions (such as they are) in a clear concise manner is also an issue.

I see DCP and his role as analogous to that of a reasonably talented attorney who has worked himself into position of having to defend a client that is as guilty as hell, and is losing his appetite for the continued charade.

He has the additional problem that his client is being seen in an ever less favorable light by the general public because the ridiculous nature of the client's assertions and defense. The more the public finds out about the client's case, the more difficult it becomes to defend the client, and the more discomfiture the attorney experiences.

From what I have read from the writings of DCP, I would bet that he could not pass a polygraph test (and certainly not a fMRI deceptive responses test) when asked about his belief in the Book of Mormon narrative as described by Joseph Smith as he has described it on these boards, or on other troubling aspects of the LDS history and doctrine that he is obliged to defend as an apologist. (I could think of no gentler way to say this, and it is my opinion only.)

Those who would like an example of what I am talking about in general here need only read the DCP quote in my signature line. He actually wrote this. I kid you not.

[_RayAgostini]

I thought the first five minutes of this interview with Dan might give some of the "newbies" insight.

FAIR Conference Daniel C. Peterson Interview.

I think that message boards can often distort our opinions and exaggerate our conflicts. I have found this to be true with me, and that's one reason I have scaled down participation. It's not only true of this board, but MDDB, and another board I sometimes "infrequent". This isn't a "one-size" assessment, by the way. I can't fully blame "message boards", of course, but I do think they exacerbate conflicts that would not occur during face to face meetings. There's little point in having "heroes" and "villians", and in that sense, I've always liked this Solzhenitsyn quote:

“If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”

- Alexandr Solzhenitsyn

Have a good weekend.

[_Quasimodo]

Agreed. But---- it is all in the past. We can't undo it. We can, however, learn from it.

Hi MCB! (We don't chat as much as I would like). Very true! The past is the past. Sometimes, though, the past governs peoples' view of the present. The LDS Church may be going through a re-evaluation of it's beliefs, right now. Not consciously, but happening, never the less.

Bringing up things that might need to be evaluated could be good. Brigham (as you know) is at the top of my list.

[Guest]

Tons of speculation in your post.
Can you point to a piece of work where DCP is not clear and concise?

His clarity and precision are amply demonstrated in my signature line. Were you not paying attention?

I am afraid some individuals do not understand that when a doctrinal or similar question is asked it takes time to research to answer, hence why DCP may appear to be dodging the issues. Judging the way individuals cling to anything he states I can see why he apprehensive to banter on any topic.

Me too. It would be much better if folks would just ignore the silly stuff he writes and focus on the profound (when they can find it).

Additionally, I am not sure how you know what DCP knows? This just sounds silly.

I think that the quote in my signature line is a pretty good indication of what DCP "knows". And talk about silly.

Lastly, I believe you are wishfully thinking that DCP would fail a polygraph when asked about his belief in the Book of Mormon. Another silly statement.

I have no wish for Dr. Peterson to take a polygraph test or to subject himself to an fMRI scan. What I can say is that anyone who claims to be educated and capable of critical thought, yet can turn around and claim that the demonstrably false and ridiculous foundation truth claims of the LDS Church are "true", has some major disconnects in their worldview.

This goes back to DCP's apparent inability to distinguish between possibility and probability in assigning relative weight to evidence.

You are losing your audience.

One can only hope.

[_Joey]

I remember when I was in high school and used to get, year after year, that solicitation from "Who's Who in American High Schools" (or something like that).  I'm sure many here remember those letters!!!

They made you feel real popular and important.  Told you how everyone wanted to know about you and your achievements.  Hell, you were it, the best person people knew!!  Just give them some money and they were gonna give you your deserved spotlight!!!

Ah yes, prey upon ones ego and they will always show interest to participate!!!

Still seems to work today!!

And, by the way, glad to see Peterson has come out of his semi annual announcements of retirement from this board, once again, and again and again!!!!!!

Ego addiction is still an addiction - just ask a certain member of congress from Queens!!

As I've predicted before, Peterson will retire more times from this board than Jordan and Farve have ever combined times tenfold!!

[_lostindc]

Tons of speculation in your post.
Can you point to a piece of work where DCP is not clear and concise?

His clarity and precision are amply demonstrated in my signature line. Were you not paying attention?

I am afraid some individuals do not understand that when a doctrinal or similar question is asked it takes time to research to answer, hence why DCP may appear to be dodging the issues. Judging the way individuals cling to anything he states I can see why he apprehensive to banter on any topic.

Me too. It would be much better if folks would just ignore the silly stuff he writes and focus on the profound (when they can find it).

Additionally, I am not sure how you know what DCP knows? This just sounds silly.

I think that the quote in my signature line is a pretty good indication of what DCP "knows". And talk about silly.

Lastly, I believe you are wishfully thinking that DCP would fail a polygraph when asked about his belief in the Book of Mormon. Another silly statement.

I have no wish for Dr. Peterson to take a polygraph test or to subject himself to an fMRI scan. What I can say is that anyone who claims to be educated and capable of critical thought, yet can turn around and claim that the demonstrably false and ridiculous foundation truth claims of the LDS Church are "true", has some major disconnects in their worldview.

This goes back to DCP's apparent inability to distinguish between possibility and probability in assigning relative weight to evidence.

You are losing your audience.

One can only hope.

To silly to even argue

[_DrW]

To silly to even argue

It is too silly to argue if you have no argument. And you have none.

Faithful LDS have no idea, none whatsoever, as to how silly their truth claims sound when they are recounted to rational, critical thinking individuals.

For example, as a faithful member of the LDS Church, you probably see nothing wrong or ironic in the comment below regarding the "Book of Mormon" musical (made by an Mormon audience member) as quoted in the Washington Post.

Of course, parody isn’t reality, and it’s the very distortion that makes it appealing and often funny. The danger is not when people laugh but when they take it seriously – if they leave a theater believing that Mormons really do live in some kind of a surreal world of self-deception and illusion.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/post/why-i-wont-be-seeing-the-book-of-mormon-musical/2011/04/14/AFiEn1fD_blog.html

[_Daniel Peterson]

glad to see Peterson has come out of his semi annual announcements of retirement from this board, once again, and again and again!!!!!!

Joey!!!!!! Could you locate and share my most recent announcement of my retirement from this board????!!!!?????!!!!!! By definition, it was posted within the past six months!!!!!!! In fact, could you post the one before that, as well???!!!!!????!!!!!! It will, apparently, have been posted on the board absolutely no more than a year ago!!!!!!!!

I would very much like to read them!!!!!!!

Thanks!!!!!! In advance!!!!!!!

Those who would like an example of what I am talking about in general here need only read the DCP quote in my signature line. He actually wrote this. I kid you not.

(Here it is, for the convenience of MDB readers: "I cheerfully admit, and routinely say, that Mormonism has not proven its claims. I don't think it's supposed to do so, either, and, accordingly, I reject your claim that it has failed to do so.")

Given his complacent assertions that I'm "incapable of understanding . . . the difference between possibility and probability," that I "lack [the ability] to think logically," and etc., I wonder if it isn't just a tad embarrassing to DrW that he's so obviously failed to grasp the point of the two sentences that he quotes from me. That point is quite straightforward, and, I think, not very controversial.