Grand Narratives and Mormonism

[Archaea]

I was reading Gadamer's Truth and Method, contemplating his comparison of methods used in the natural sciences with those tried for human sciences, wherein he observes how the observations must also consider the observer, and many other things.

But what caught my mind's eye was the thought, that maybe insofar as Mormonism endeavors to express a grand narrative explaining epistemology and morality, it will inherently fail. The great sociologists ultimately failed and most social scientists who sought to circumscribe humanity into a set of stories and rules have failed. The predictive quality of these systems are of limited value.

Will Mormonism fail in its very bold attempt to continue to express its grand narrative and will continue to limit its sphere as time moves on?

Tooblue, you should read Gadamer, if you have not, his words will interest you.

[Archaea]

Many ancient cultures enjoyed founding myths to explain the core values of the culture. One famous one is the Mahabharata, which explores the Indian values of dharma, or sacred duty. It involves an eighteen day battle that destroys all but five Pandavi brothers.

Greek society had several founding myths, Egyptian society and others.

American society once enjoyed some, but does it today.

Joseph Smith endeavored to create a foundation, but I will argue that modern Mormonism has shied away from its founding myths and moved to a safer field, fearing the boldness of Joseph Smith for safer recognizable fields of safe harbors already cut out mainstream Christianity.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Joseph Smith endeavored to create a foundation, but I will argue that modern Mormonism has shied away from its founding myths and moved to a safer field, fearing the boldness of Joseph Smith for safer recognizable fields of safe harbors already cut out mainstream Christianity.

I am not so sure I agree with that. What founding myths have we abandoned?

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

I am not so sure I agree with that. What founding myths have we abandoned?

Polygamy as the new and everlasting covenant.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

I am not so sure I agree with that. What founding myths have we abandoned?

The binding thread of our myths is revelation. Joseph Smith has braved new grounds in claiming men could become as Gods. Tertulian and Origin hypothesized it as well, but we have all but gone mum on that subject. We are cowardly and shrink away from the narrative.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Archaea

The binding thread of our myths is revelation.

OK. That's a good point. But do you really think that JS's flowrate of revelation was sustainable?

Originally Posted by Archaea

Joseph Smith has braved new grounds in claiming men could become as Gods. Tertulian and Origin hypothesized it as well, but we have all but gone mum on that subject. We are cowardly and shrink away from the narrative.

GBH's equivocation with Mike Wallace notwithstanding (I am still scratching my head on that one), I am not so sure we have distanced ourselves from that one. I hear it preached all the time.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by YOhio

Polygamy as the new and everlasting covenant.

I wouldn't exactly call JS "bold" with regards to that one.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

I wouldn't exactly call JS "bold" with regards to that one.

If we were bold, we would challenge our people more overtly to becoming the best we can become. It would be a banner challenging us more, to attend the Harvards, Stanfords and MIT. Yes we have the soft challenges, but we seem to have gone soft on striving for beyond excellence, developing superior ethics and character.

Mike has gone off on the Mormons who wrote the torture memos, and I thought he went a little whacko on the subject, but OTOH, if we wish to improve our character maybe that sort of thing shouldn't exist amongst us.

Right now, there are plenty of other groups as good or better than we are, speaking collectively and not individually.

We are now bureaucratic, not bold. The flow of revelation is below a trickle. Unless administrative directives are revelations, we are all but shut off from revelation. We no longer seek, perhaps wisely so, to blend theology with science and whatever else. Maybe that's the way of a maturing faith, but we appear to have shrunk quietly into the dark.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Archaea

If we were bold, we would challenge our people more overtly to becoming the best we can become.

Have you ever listened to a Hinckley conference talk? Have you been in a coma since 1995?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Tex

Have you ever listened to a Hinckley conference talk? Have you been in a coma since 1995?

It's not the football coach mentality or challenge I'm accustomed to in sports. It's, "okay, we can do better."

No I'd like to see High, high goals aspired to by our membership at large, seeking to be the best authors, historians, scientists, physicians, accountants, musicians and the like.

We should strive for more athletic excellence. There is not enough excellence stressed.