04-11-2007, 09:04 PM | #21 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Without passing judgment on whether or not SIEQ needs to apologize, let me just ask this: if you are willing to accept the judgment of the rest of the group in this thread as they point out what they perceive as SIEQ's failure to fairly discuss a matter why do you refuse to acknowledge the same group's consensus when it is directed at you?
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
04-11-2007, 09:09 PM | #22 | |
Senior Member
|
Quote:
SEIQ should be more like me. *edited*...the last comment above was purely TIC for those about to go postal.
__________________
Masquerading as Cougarguards very own genius dumbass since 05'. Last edited by RockyBalboa; 04-11-2007 at 09:12 PM. |
|
04-11-2007, 09:24 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between Iraq and a hard place
Posts: 7,569
|
|
04-11-2007, 09:28 PM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,177
|
I read the Mauss article and the Oaks article and caught up on this thread.
I'm on record for having little compassion to the intellectual's plight in the church the way the group intellectual is self-defined by that group and the way their plight is described. But I appreciate the link and the opportunity to discuss. I especially liked the part of the article that showed the background on alternate voices within the church and the movement to consolidatary and need for outside of the church alternate voices--the part Archaea reposted. I'm not sure I totally buy it, but I understand it. And I'm OK with it. Nothing Mauss says about the need for the alternate voices and the benefit they provide the church is wrong. It's all in content and delivery. If an intellectual is writing critical, mean-spirited, attacking kind of stuff, then he puts himself in Oak's category of the wolves among sheep. If he's exploring a topic in an honest, fair way and Sunstone's the only outlet, then I'm fine with it, and I agree there is benefit to the church in that. What I'm afraid of something I (or Oaks) would label as the bad stuff, the intellectuals would think is A-OK. The church has a right to label those individuals as wolves so the sheep know who to avoid. And if word came down from on high that someone needs to back off or shut up or be in trouble with the church, then that intellectual then becomes a poster boy for victimization. I find the list of 10 pretty manipulative. Mauss uses it to set up a situation where the intellectuals are already the poor innocent victims with the church as the bullies. I fail to see the empirical evidence of this. I feel the number of times intellectuals are disciplined or ostracized as being relatively low, and when it does happen, there seems to be some valid reasons. SIEQ has never been disciplined. My liberal, intellectual professor friend has never been disciplined, and is in fact moving up the ladder of church leadership. Michael Quinn = disciplined. Lavina Anderson = disciplined. I've also made this point before, but I don't like the definition of intellectual in this instance. Intellectual as defined by the intellectuals is an extremely narrow group of history/liberal arts doctorates, but not just all said doctorates, you also have to have a non-mainstream bent, and an interest in controversial topics. That's an extremely small group and defining such a group and then going to the victimization card because not enough of you are GA's or stake presidents or whatever just doesn't sway my sympathies in your direction. I'm definitely not an enemy to intellectuals, though. I'm all for discussion and learning. Just keep the whining down. |
04-11-2007, 09:34 PM | #25 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,016
|
Quote:
|
|
04-11-2007, 09:41 PM | #26 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Jay:
I believe you misinterpret Dr. Mauss in number 10. Enduring not due to suppression but enduring because a full and free, academic type discussion will not be had in a modern, corporate structure of a Church. Intellectuals are not persecuted per se, but rather the full expression of ideas will not be allowed, and in fact, our theology is purposefully dumbed down due to its developing an international character.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
04-11-2007, 09:52 PM | #27 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,177
|
Quote:
|
|
04-11-2007, 10:05 PM | #28 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The People's Republic of Monsanto
Posts: 3,085
|
It just seemed like Indy was going with his usual MO. If he really wants to discuss this, I'm more than happy to do so.
__________________
"Do not despise the words of prophets, but test everything; hold fast to what is good; " 1 Thess. 5:21 (NRSV) We all trust our own unorthodoxies. |
04-11-2007, 10:12 PM | #29 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,016
|
Quote:
And certainly in others I'm an ignorant fool |
|
04-11-2007, 10:27 PM | #30 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Norcal
Posts: 5,821
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|