Jersey Girl wrote:I'm entirely fascinated by psychology. Does anyone get the impression that the line between message boards and in real life just permanently and visibly blurred on that blog?
Kishkumen wrote:I was astonished to see what happened. It was a moment of truth to be sure. The cat is out of the bag.
Jersey Girl wrote:Well, I will leave it to you all to further comment right now. I'm just saying that as a person who is non-LDS affiliated on these boards, what I think I saw take place in the comments section is remarkable from a psyche perspective.
This, Jersey Girl, is why I think Dr Scratch's "nuclear-level meltdown" was so apt. I think the Mopologist goal should be properly circumscribed to helping questioning members sort out troubling information that conflicts with the Church's truth claims. This is probably best done in the confines of personal interviews, not publications like the FARMS review--but at least there, the 'product' can undergo editorial taming down before it becomes published and public. Not on message boards (even where as here Mormonism is the dedicated topic) for thousands to see, as it can stir up more cognitive dissonance for the doubting Mormon who sees the rebuttals to the defenses and sees the mean-spirited 'politics of personal destruction' used by the defenders to try to discredit the critics (and thereby defuse their criticisms of Mormonism). And particularly not in the mainstream 'net, such as Time online, where personal, mean-spirited and poor-me defenses are out there for all Time readers to stumble across without so much as doing a Google search for things Mormon, and the reiterations of criticisms in that same forum that are leveled in response to the defenses being aired there.
Religious apologetics should be tucked away in a small, obscure corner that is quiet and does not attract attention, but is a resource that doubting members can contact or be referred to for personal explanations of the defenses to that information that is contrary to the religion's truth claims.
However, when they publish, when they go online--particularly outside the confines of places that are dedicated to Mormon topics, such as outside like the Time online site it--the apologist draws attention that does more harm to his religion than it possibly could do good. But in their hubris, the bloated egos of apologists, and in this case the NAMIRS trio+Schryver, could not help themselves. They do not have enough self-discipline to have checked themselves from embarrassing themselves and their own religious cause.
In short, they demonstrated a nuclear-level meltdown, Simon's inclinations and opinions to the contrary notwithstanding.