Robin, I actually meant YOUR underlying attitude. And I did get the joke, I just didn't think it or the premise was very amusing. I went back and reveiwed the thread at which point my eyes glazed over and I decided I really don't care enough to argue about it anymore, especially given the chance I was wrong. I do concede I over-reacted, however. Should I go back and delete all my posts? Naw, how immature would that be?

SU, glad you found this amusing. Not sure if you're laughing with or at the turn of events, and I guess I don't really care.

Now THAT's funny.

Its all good Creekster. I realize that your generation, the Greatest Generation, grew hard (jaded?) facing trials head on, with nothing but a determination and a dry martini, but kids these days put it out there... we keep it real. If you want to 'care' that is okay. Hell, let out a manly yawp and DELETE! DELETE those posts if your heart tells you to. It is a brave new world of being and feeling, and if my emotions offend you... if my LOVE for Mike Waters offends you, then I say go rent Far From Heaven and realize that it is never too late for men... MEN of your generation to embrace their true emotional self, and step up to the plate.

Swing batter batter!

(what was the 'underlying attitude' of that? :))

I've got to admit that I chuckled about this for hours last night. I thought of several witty responses, but my better judgement tells me that I should quit this thread before I embarass myself more.

See you in a few weeks, Robin.

I enjoyed the first 50 posts, as the respondants conveyed their caricatures through personal terministic screens. But now the thread has simply devolved into a food fight.

<-- throws a few cracked avacados at Robin

Nobody ever answered my questions, but it did degenerate into a food fight.

I suppose we would need some intellectuals here to tell us who LDS intellectuals are. In light of the dearth of real intellectuals on this board, none can identify that with which they are not acquainted.

Who are the leaders in science and technology for the LDS Church?

Who are the leaders of literature? Is it really Orson Scott Card? Now, I enjoy his work, and really don't like the "fistory" Work and Glory stuff. Yet, with all the great Jewish writers is our most preeminent writer a science fiction writer, a genre which is not taken seriously amongst the ivory tower types.

In terms of computers, who are the leaders, the guys at Dell or Micron?

In terms of linguistics, who are the current leaders?

In terms of law, who is the top LDS lawyer? Judge?

In terms of medicine, who are the leaders?

Are there any great genetists? Archeologists? Anthropologists? Egyptologists?

Great engineers?

Great LDS financiers?

Great phsycists or chemists?

Biochemists?

I really want to know.

The field of Mormon studies is a narrow, and for many persons, uninteresting field. There's no money in it. So unless you have a generous benefactor such as Ira Fulton or a Marriott, no university will care enough to fund it.

Objectively, there are very few Mormons, even proportionately, who have excelled in the arts, sciences, and history, in terms of being truly world class. Outside of Henry Eyring, Orson Scott Card and Richard Bushman, who are they? I would put an astrisk on Bushman's name because his single world class achievement has a nexus to Mormonism. I really couldn't tell you who else to list. Where I would say Mormons have more than held their own is in business and sports. Arguably the law. But in the law Rex Lee stands out, and no one today comes close to his stature and achievements. Michael Young comes closest. Is he still active LDS? Mormonsim does not have a rich intellectual tradition. Why? Partly its youth as a culture; also, its culture does not place a high value on intellectual pursuits, in my opinion. If someone wants to prove me wrong, add to my list above.

Yeah, I mean heaven forbid an intellectuals achievement has a nexus to Mormonism. That certainly is grounds to minimize his accomplishments. (rolls eyes).

I'm sorry. You misunderstood. Where the work is narrowly focused on matters relevant to Mormonism's origins and creed, the work will necessary attract little interest outside of Mormons and the impact on our larger culture will be minimal. Scan the above posts and you will see Archea admits as much. Hence the astrisk. However, Bushman's biography has attracted widespread admiration from academics and literary critics for its technical quality as a biography.