Honorentheos, you and I wouldn't even be having this conversation if we didn't think that open and honest discussion was a good thing. Are there different subjective opinions, some that hold that open and honest discussion is good and some that say it is evil? Is whether a person is a troll or not depend on people's subjective opinion? I know there are differences of opinion over whether or not some things are good, but lack of consensus today doesn't mean there won't ever be consensus. Look at the advancement of medical knowledge from 1500 CE to 2000 CE. That advancement didn't happen because medicine is subjective; it happened because medical knowledge in 1500 was wrong. I see no inherent reason to believe we can't make similar advancements in understanding what is good; I'm not convinced that what is good is as subjective as you make it out to be.honorentheos wrote: ↑Wed Aug 10, 2022 5:07 amProbably because "good" is a value judgement that assumes a subjective opinion as a point of comparison. One has to accept a certain set of values first before one can judge something to be "good".
Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
-
- Bishop
- Posts: 514
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2022 1:09 am
Re: Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
-
- God
- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm
Re: Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
It’s responses like this one from IHAQ that cause me to think as to whether or not critics give the same due diligence for uncovering answers and answering questions as they seem to demand from believers.MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 4:15 pmIt might be well to flesh this out a bit more:
The conclusion of this essay:
…the Nephites were racist. This appears to be the most plausible view, and a close reading of the Book of Mormon appears to uphold this view. We get a hint of Nephites being racist toward the Lamanites in descriptions made of the Lamanites by the Nephites…
https://rationalfaiths.com/racism-in-th ... of-Mormon/
I might suggest reading this essay and gaining a greater appreciation for historical context.
One of the Book of Mormon record keepers, Moroni, says the following about the Book of Mormon and the fallibility of its record keepers:
“Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father, because of his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been.”
(Mormon 9:31)
In summary, the most plausible interpretation of the issue of skin color (as you read in 3 Nephi 2:15) is that it was more an issue of the racism that the Nephites held against the Lamanites; there was no actual change in skin color. One should not be surprised that someone from the 7th century BC through the 5th century AD would hold such horrible racist views. In fact, one of the reasons that Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan is so powerful is because of the racist views that Jews held toward the Samaritans.
Regards,
MG
Regards,
MG
-
- God
- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:45 pm
Re: Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
-
- God
- Posts: 5287
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm
Re: Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
i would argue that the wrong ideas about medical knowledge could quite clearly be defined as subjective, in the sense that they were based on opinions that were not objectively formed. As knowledge of medicine and the capacity to investigate increased, people's "opinions" regardingKevinSim wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 6:18 pmHonorentheos, you and I wouldn't even be having this conversation if we didn't think that open and honest discussion was a good thing. Are there different subjective opinions, some that hold that open and honest discussion is good and some that say it is evil? Is whether a person is a troll or not depend on people's subjective opinion? I know there are differences of opinion over whether or not some things are good, but lack of consensus today doesn't mean there won't ever be consensus. Look at the advancement of medical knowledge from 1500 CE to 2000 CE. That advancement didn't happen because medicine is subjective; it happened because medical knowledge in 1500 was wrong. I see no inherent reason to believe we can't make similar advancements in understanding what is good; I'm not convinced that what is good is as subjective as you make it out to be.honorentheos wrote: ↑Wed Aug 10, 2022 5:07 amProbably because "good" is a value judgement that assumes a subjective opinion as a point of comparison. One has to accept a certain set of values first before one can judge something to be "good".
medicine moved to a more objective understanding, based on observable fact.
the concept of "goodness" is qualitatively different. Advancements can come in the direction of evolving the set of values underlying the term, in my opinion, but there is no observable fact making that evolution of opinion and value a single path for all.
Comparing an adjective like goodness to medical knowledge, as though it is on a trajectory toward a single definitive objective definition, ignores the underlying premise that a set of values determines "goodness."
-
- God
- Posts: 1531
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:00 am
Re: Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
Miguel Barker-Valdez has a reason for writing his personal essay and for wanting the Nephites to be racist rather than God…MG 2.0 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 4:15 pmIt might be well to flesh this out a bit more:
The conclusion of this essay:
…the Nephites were racist. This appears to be the most plausible view, and a close reading of the Book of Mormon appears to uphold this view. We get a hint of Nephites being racist toward the Lamanites in descriptions made of the Lamanites by the Nephites…
https://rationalfaiths.com/racism-in-th ... of-Mormon/
I might suggest reading this essay and gaining a greater appreciation for historical context.
One of the Book of Mormon record keepers, Moroni, says the following about the Book of Mormon and the fallibility of its record keepers:
“Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father, because of his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been.”
(Mormon 9:31)
In summary, the most plausible interpretation of the issue of skin color (as you read in 3 Nephi 2:15) is that it was more an issue of the racism that the Nephites held against the Lamanites; there was no actual change in skin color. One should not be surprised that someone from the 7th century BC through the 5th century AD would hold such horrible racist views. In fact, one of the reasons that Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan is so powerful is because of the racist views that Jews held toward the Samaritans.
Regards,
MG
“As a physician’s assistant in an orthopedic surgery clinic, patients have referred to me as “the well-dressed Mexican,” the surgeon’s “little Japanese friend,” and most recently, “the man from East India.” Facebook has pegged me as “77% Brazilian, 13% Japanese.” My father called my brother (Paul) and me his “little Lamanites” when we were children.”
https://sunstone.org/rorschach-test/
Rather than some random guy on the internet trying to make sense of his own personal upbringing, can you give me an official church reference that promotes the view it was the Nephites who were racist, not God?
-
- God
- Posts: 1531
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:00 am
Re: Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
-
- God
- Posts: 5547
- Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am
Re: Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Believers tend not to understand the null hypothesis, and think the two sides have an equal burden of proof. They do not.
-
- God
- Posts: 1531
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:00 am
Re: Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
Where did MGSim2.0 go?
-
- God
- Posts: 3866
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am
Re: Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
Thank you, Marcus. Well put.Marcus wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 8:55 pmComparing an adjective like goodness to medical knowledge, as though it is on a trajectory toward a single definitive objective definition, ignores the underlying premise that a set of values determines "goodness."KevinSim wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 6:18 pm
Honorentheos, you and I wouldn't even be having this conversation if we didn't think that open and honest discussion was a good thing. Are there different subjective opinions, some that hold that open and honest discussion is good and some that say it is evil? Is whether a person is a troll or not depend on people's subjective opinion? I know there are differences of opinion over whether or not some things are good, but lack of consensus today doesn't mean there won't ever be consensus. Look at the advancement of medical knowledge from 1500 CE to 2000 CE. That advancement didn't happen because medicine is subjective; it happened because medical knowledge in 1500 was wrong. I see no inherent reason to believe we can't make similar advancements in understanding what is good; I'm not convinced that what is good is as subjective as you make it out to be.
-
- God
- Posts: 3866
- Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2020 2:15 am
Re: Faithful TBM to doubter in 6 hours on ex-Mormon Reddit
Hi KevinSim,KevinSim wrote: ↑Tue Aug 23, 2022 6:18 pmHonorentheos, you and I wouldn't even be having this conversation if we didn't think that open and honest discussion was a good thing. Are there different subjective opinions, some that hold that open and honest discussion is good and some that say it is evil? Is whether a person is a troll or not depend on people's subjective opinion? I know there are differences of opinion over whether or not some things are good, but lack of consensus today doesn't mean there won't ever be consensus. Look at the advancement of medical knowledge from 1500 CE to 2000 CE. That advancement didn't happen because medicine is subjective; it happened because medical knowledge in 1500 was wrong. I see no inherent reason to believe we can't make similar advancements in understanding what is good; I'm not convinced that what is good is as subjective as you make it out to be.honorentheos wrote: ↑Wed Aug 10, 2022 5:07 amProbably because "good" is a value judgement that assumes a subjective opinion as a point of comparison. One has to accept a certain set of values first before one can judge something to be "good".
Would you describe the sun rising as good?