The Interpreter Radio Show

[_grindael]

Also mark me down as impressed that Christensen was able to make it through a conversation without mentioning "paradigm" or "Kuhn".

They all have their dead horses.

[_Tom]

Rest in peace, Grindael.

I happened to catch a recent broadcast of the Interpreter radio program. Here are the most significant moments:

A guest notes that she and Dr. Peterson once crash-landed together in a hot air balloon in Turkey. Host Martin Tanner remarks, "Remind me not to climb into a hot air balloon with Professor Dan Peterson."

The same guest says she calls Dr. Peterson the "Street Fighter of Apologetics" and "Our Intellectual Porter Rockwell."

During a discussion of the Witnesses project in the second hour, Dr. Peterson notes that they were looking at, probably, the summer of 2021 for the dramatic film's release. He said they've interviewed about ten scholars for the documentary and wanted to interview ten more.

Dr. Peterson says he has heard reactions to the film that the actor playing Joseph Smith looks too young. Dr. Peterson says he responded, "Do you know how old he's supposed to be in that scene? . . . 23. Guess how old [the actor] is? He's 23." I would guess that the actor is actually older than 23.

Dr. Peterson wants to put up a simple website at some point featuring all of the documents related to the witnesses.

Mr. Tanner, discussing his practice of inviting listeners of his own radio show to pose any questions they want: "“Even if they ask something I don’t know anything about, if you drill down far enough, eventually—even if the surface looks bad—it will be a faith-promoting experience. I truly, truly believe that, and the more I look into it, the more it kind of has to be [a faith-promoting experience], because the church is true, so how could it be anything else?”

Dr. Peterson: "I find that, in terms of the church, too, the pushback I'm getting now is more from secularists, ex-Latter-day Saints who become atheists, who've lost all of their faith. And so that is one of the reasons why I'm interested in doing this other project, you know, my series of books. I've described it occasionally--I hate to always have this combative rhetoric--but I've described it as 'my little hand grenade to be tossed into the camp of the unbelievers.' Or, to put it another way, to cause them doubts about their doubts. I would like them to scratch their heads and say, 'you know, this is really odd. I don't know how to explain this. Maybe there's some truth to this.' Just get them to think. I don't think I can--or anybody can--give you faith with a book. You have to get it for yourself."

[_Philo Sofee]

Daniel C. Peterson
-I hate to always have this combative rhetoric--but I've described it as 'my little hand grenade to be tossed into the camp of the unbelievers.' Or, to put it another way, to cause them doubts about their doubts. I would like them to scratch their heads and say, 'you know, this is really odd. I don't know how to explain this. Maybe there's some truth to this.' Just get them to think. I don't think I can--or anybody can--give you faith with a book. You have to get it for yourself."

Yawn! Boring..........same old Kool Aid, which I quit drinking a loooooooong time ago....... his hand grenade won't even hold a candle to a mere firecracker........all noise, no damage.

[_Lemmie]

Reading back through this thread was fun. Where else would I have come upon this delightful definition of feminism and who can speak about it than in the Interpreter Comment section?

Feminism in its broadest sense is just looking at things from the perspective of women, which are after all 50% of all humans. Julie is a woman, so she is likely to give that perspective.

[_Jersey Girl]

Reading back through this thread was fun. Where else would I have come upon this delightful definition of feminism and who can speak about it than in the Interpreter Comment section?

Feminism in its broadest sense is just looking at things from the perspective of women, which are after all 50% of all humans. Julie is a woman, so she is likely to give that perspective.

Oh lord.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Rest in peace, Grindael.

I happened to catch a recent broadcast of the Interpreter radio program. Here are the most significant moments:

Tom:

I cannot thank you enough for bringing all of this to our attention. Very valuable. If I may, I'd like to comment on a few things...

A guest notes that she and Dr. Peterson once crash-landed together in a hot air balloon in Turkey. Host Martin Tanner remarks, "Remind me not to climb into a hot air balloon with Professor Dan Peterson."

When I first read this (I admit that I was scanning over it in an arguably hasty way), I read it as, "Remind me not to climb onto the hot air balloon that is Professor Dan Peterson."

The same guest says she calls Dr. Peterson the "Street Fighter of Apologetics" and "Our Intellectual Porter Rockwell."

I'm sure that this was the highlight of his entire year. That, and getting to stick it to the CDC by defying their rules!

During a discussion of the Witnesses project in the second hour, Dr. Peterson notes that they were looking at, probably, the summer of 2021 for the dramatic film's release. He said they've interviewed about ten scholars for the documentary and wanted to interview ten more.

If that's the case, then why did they recently have a "gathering" of 50+ people in an enclosed space during the pandemic?

Dr. Peterson says he has heard reactions to the film that the actor playing Joseph Smith looks too young. Dr. Peterson says he responded, "Do you know how old he's supposed to be in that scene? . . . 23. Guess how old [the actor] is? He's 23." I would guess that the actor is actually older than 23.

The main, rather mean criticisms of the actor that I've heard have had to do with his (mostly moving-violations-related) criminal record--not his age. But okay.

Dr. Peterson wants to put up a simple website at some point featuring all of the documents related to the witnesses.

Oh, I have little doubt that it will be "simple." LOL!

Mr. Tanner, discussing his practice of inviting listeners of his own radio show to pose any questions they want: "“Even if they ask something I don’t know anything about, if you drill down far enough, eventually—even if the surface looks bad—it will be a faith-promoting experience. I truly, truly believe that, and the more I look into it, the more it kind of has to be [a faith-promoting experience], because the church is true, so how could it be anything else?”

Dr. Peterson: "I find that, in terms of the church, too, the pushback I'm getting now is more from secularists, ex-Latter-day Saints who become atheists, who've lost all of their faith. And so that is one of the reasons why I'm interested in doing this other project, you know, my series of books. I've described it occasionally--I hate to always have this combative rhetoric--but I've described it as 'my little hand grenade to be tossed into the camp of the unbelievers.' Or, to put it another way, to cause them doubts about their doubts. I would like them to scratch their heads and say, 'you know, this is really odd. I don't know how to explain this. Maybe there's some truth to this.' Just get them to think. I don't think I can--or anybody can--give you faith with a book. You have to get it for yourself."

Okay. Then why bother with the book? Not exactly a very convincing endorsement, is it?

[_Tom]

I must confess that I am concerned that the Street Fighter of Mopologetics is not getting substantive feedback at the film’s various showings. Has anyone commented on Joseph using the sacred plates as a weapon against the ruffian? Has anyone criticized the inaccuracies in the translation scene or the silliness of the courtroom scene? I would attend one of these showings to offer some constructive criticism, but I’m not about to sit in a theater with 50 other people, including a number of senior citizens who are highly vulnerable to the virus. It’s probably safer to attend one of Kwacovid’s NCMO lap-dance parties featuring the hottest hits of 2010. (Speaking of Kwacovid, he’s putting on a “Mask-Querade Dance Party” tonight. I am not making this up.)

[_malkie]

Daniel C. Peterson
-I hate to always have this combative rhetoric--but I've described it as 'my little hand grenade to be tossed into the camp of the unbelievers.' Or, to put it another way, to cause them doubts about their doubts. I would like them to scratch their heads and say, 'you know, this is really odd. I don't know how to explain this. Maybe there's some truth to this.' Just get them to think. I don't think I can--or anybody can--give you faith with a book. You have to get it for yourself."

Yawn! Boring..........same old Kool Aid, which I quit drinking a loooooooong time ago....... his hand grenade won't even hold a candle to a mere firecracker........all noise, no damage.

I don't know, Philo.

Doesn't every atheist you know feel as if a hand grenade had been tossed into their camp when they find something they can't explain.

It's so easy for a believer: "goddidit" - end of story.

But to an atheist - it is totally devastating.

Remember the bad old days when we couldn't explain thunder, or rain, or the retrogade motion of the planets? Thanks to the god-whose-existence-we-deny, there was religion to help us out so that our intellectual worlds didn't explode.

Perhaps DCP is onto something.

[_Kishkumen]

"I find that, in terms of the church, too, the pushback I'm getting now is more from secularists, ex-Latter-day Saints who become atheists, who've lost all of their faith. And so that is one of the reasons why I'm interested in doing this other project, you know, my series of books. I've described it occasionally--I hate to always have this combative rhetoric--but I've described it as 'my little hand grenade to be tossed into the camp of the unbelievers.' Or, to put it another way, to cause them doubts about their doubts. I would like them to scratch their heads and say, 'you know, this is really odd. I don't know how to explain this. Maybe there's some truth to this.' Just get them to think. I don't think I can--or anybody can--give you faith with a book. You have to get it for yourself."

Cause them to doubt their doubts?!?!?!

In the present context I think “owning the libs” would be a better comparison. I can’t think of any successes he has had at getting atheist ex-Mormons to “doubt their doubts.”

[_Res Ipsa]

"I find that, in terms of the church, too, the pushback I'm getting now is more from secularists, ex-Latter-day Saints who become atheists, who've lost all of their faith. And so that is one of the reasons why I'm interested in doing this other project, you know, my series of books. I've described it occasionally--I hate to always have this combative rhetoric--but I've described it as 'my little hand grenade to be tossed into the camp of the unbelievers.' Or, to put it another way, to cause them doubts about their doubts. I would like them to scratch their heads and say, 'you know, this is really odd. I don't know how to explain this. Maybe there's some truth to this.' Just get them to think. I don't think I can--or anybody can--give you faith with a book. You have to get it for yourself."

Cause them to doubt their doubts?!?!?!

In the present context I think “owning the libs” would be a better comparison. I can’t think of any successes he has had at getting atheist ex-Mormons to “doubt their doubts.”

Comments like that convince me that Peterson has neither the experience nor the empathy to understand what it's like to be an atheist. I suspect that the vast majority of us interpret the world through some form of rational skepticism. For a rational skeptic, doubting is as ingrained as breathing. The rational skeptic understands that her conclusions are probabilistic judgments that are subject to change depending on changes in the facts.

Rational skeptics feel no obligation to "explain" everything. They understand that there is evidence we can't access and may never be able to access. They understand that the response to questions they cannot answer is "I don't know," and not "it must be something supernatural." For a rational skeptic, Peterson's hand grenades don't explode. The response is: "I don't know -- let's look at the evidence and see if we can figure it out.

I fully understand the god of the gaps argument. No volume of questions I can't answer is going to persuade me that the best way to respond to unknowns is to make up something supernatural to fill the gap. Doing so has a very poor track record in answering questions about the world.

Doubt your doubts is a cute little thought-stopping phrase. Maybe it's comforting to LDS folks who have doubts but don't want to. To me, it's not an invitation to think. It's an invitation to not think.