[Forgotten_Charity]

Ilovechrist77 wrote:

Since we’re on the subject, I used to wear mesh garments in the summer, but I heard the church doesn’t make those anymore. You see, summers out here in Illinois can get pretty hot and humid. What type of garments are good for hot weather? :problem:

I can give you general and specific information with material for hot and or humid weather.

There are 3 main materials Cotten, linen and rayon.

Each have advantages and disadvantages and not much is helpful past the 90f+90 humidity danger zone.

1-Cotten– it’s great for heat as it’s very breathable and wicks away moisture quickly but it’s very bad for high humidity because it retains moisture for a long time and can lead to heat rash among other things.

2- Linen — it is also good I’m hot places but bit as good as Cotten. It has much more advantage in a humid area because moisture from being soaked can evaporate much more quickly then Cotten. It’s major disadvantage is mildew in very high humid environments.

3- Rayon(my personal favorite when in a hot+ humid environment.

It breaths easily and absorbs moisture easily while evaporating almost as well as linen. But it is not as durable and needs dry cleaning unless you can get HMW(high-wet modulus) Rayon which is machine washable.

I can’t find any rayon garments though. So outer garments will have to do.

If it’s a particularly bad day for heat and humidity then reversible outer clothing with cotton and or rayon on one side and linen or rayon in the other to absurd moisture then flip inside out to allow the moisture to dissipate while being dry in the now inside layer will help to wick away moisture from the nylon garments.

They can be found in stores like REI or underarmor etc.

Stay away from polyester, wool, it silk fabrics in hot and or humid environments.

Hope this helps you.

[Forgotten_Charity]

Old-Timer wrote:

I was waiting for the resident nudist to add that link.

😆

[Forgotten_Charity]

Quote:

We find that responses to corrections in mock news articles differ significantly according to subjects’ ideological views. As a result, the corrections fail to reduce misperceptions for the most committed participants. Even worse, they actually strengthen misperceptions among ideological subgroups in several cases. Additional results suggest that these conclusions are not specific to the Iraq war; not related to the salience of death; and not a reaction to the source of the correction.

[…]

The backfire effects that we found seem to provide further support for the growing literature showing that citizens engage in “motivated reasoning.” While our experiments focused on assessing the effectiveness of corrections, the results show that direct factual contradictions can actually strengthen ideologically grounded factual beliefs – an empirical finding with important theoretical implications.

Quote:

Does partisanship poison the brain? Not quite, but an ingenious new study suggests that having strong political views can compromise one’s ability to make sense of the mathematical underpinnings of complex and politically charged issues like gun control and global warming.

For the study, researchers led in part by Dan Kahan, a professor of law and psychology at Yale University, recruited more than 1,000 people and gave them the raw statistics needed to gauge the effectiveness of a politically neutral product (a skin cream for rashes) and another “product” that was politically charged (a gun control law).

Many of the subjects lacked the basic math skills needed to arrive at accurate answers — no surprise there. But what about the people who did have strong math skills?

When it came to evaluating the effectiveness of the gun control law, it all seemed to hinge on their political leanings: when the statistics pointed to a conclusion that was aligned with their political leanings — for example, pro-gun laws or anti-gun laws — they did just as well on the gun control problem as on the skin cream problem. But when the numbers supported a conclusion that went against their belief, they fared much worse.

The discrepancy suggests that even intelligent people allow their biases to cloud their quantitative decision-making skills when dealing with politically charged information.

Chris Mooney, Huffington Post blogger, science writer, and the author of Unscientific American, put it this way:

Our political passions can even undermine our very basic reasoning skills. More specifically, the study finds that people who are otherwise very good at math may totally flunk a problem that they would otherwise probably be able to solve, simply because giving the right answer goes against their political beliefs.

And it doesn’t seem to matter when one is a bleeding heart or a rabid reactionary — the same math-compromising effect is believed to affect people on both ends of the political spectrum and everyone in between.

Even “people who do understand science still let their beliefs cloud their judgment,” Cambridge mathematician Dr. James Grime said in a video about the study. “If your conclusion reinforces your preconceived ideas, then you stop looking further” to make sure your conclusion is right.

This paper is part of a series designed to examine the tendency of people to bend or manipulate data or events in order to fit preconceived opinions, Kahan told The Huffington Post in an email.

The study, “Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-Government,” was published online through the Social Science Research Network on Sept. 3.

The sane is true for religion. It’s why highly intelligent people can still hold beliefs even when known facts contradict them.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4060350/” class=”bbcode_url”>http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4060350/

There is a huge lesson in here when talking about or to friends, spouse love ones even in a FC and thinking facts will help them understand. It only entrenches more if they are dogmatic or entrenched in the belief political, religious or otherwise.

[Forgotten_Charity]

Ya I usually enjoy it to, with the right friends or people who don’t have river identity attached to a party.

For that reason and to disassociate with dogma in a party I became unaffiliated. I like Thomas Jeffersons views on this.

It’s just impossible to talk politics or religion with people that won’t look at or consider all available research and information and defend their views dogmatically without considering, thinking and looking at it.

[Forgotten_Charity]

First thank you for the effort and the time I know it takes to do this.

There is another thing which I am becoming increasingly aware of. Is that many people are leaving on unrelated history topics. I hear(from the horses mouth) 2 primary causes for this. 1- I guess. You would call gossip and overbearingness. They didn’t are not aware of history issues yet but had their membership cancelled because of too many people in the priesthood leader ship talking about their problems from one leadership to another about personal issues problems not a church problem that they didn’t want known or people preaching to them about after they told them non of their business.

The 2nd is consciousness, they are bothered by the churches increasing political pressure at church meetings, frequent announcement referrals on how they should stand on certain issues by referring to what to read as policy.

In other words many are tired of living their life at home and priesthood leadership running interference with those personal lives at home(not respecting boundaries even after they tell them no).

About 20 in the ward past 1 1/2 years have left over these things that I know of. They feel suffocated and feel the only way to ease the suffocation is for the brethren to back off and not share tiger problem around with other authorities when their issues are not effecting other church members.

So I guess respecting boundaries and not micro-managing is a issue that I am seeing that is looking as big as history.

I’m not sure how that plays out into talking and implementation though. Or if it’s a concern over there. But I find it common in several geographical areas.

These issues that have increased in the last few years have caused sacrament attendance to plummet to 19%. After verbal confrontation by the member to priesthood authorities during church after bring tired of these issues.

[Forgotten_Charity]

I’ve been in wards recently where the SP, HC and AA and area PR department hosted a 3rd block politics combined activism for the obligation to social media share(civilian and covenant). The central talk showed central PR deportment videos with no LDS logo or wording for easy sharing across denominations to generate politically united organized religious denominations and people together on certain issues especially freedom of religion(. It’s a attempted united approach to convince people to vote with their religious beliefs on various issues that there is a grave threat and danger of it being destroyed. The PR did say “I know this seems like political issues and may make you uncomfortable but these are religious issues which you are under covenant to not just defend but actively be involved and to get others involved.

Weird. Most of it was framed around “facts” as reasons to do those things though. Interesting because the studies that he cites don’t say the things he said they said. The “facts” of the studies say something quite different then what was presented in the videos. I guess we we’re suppose to take the videos word for it and not to have actually read such studies. Again weird, I’m not sure if it’s indication of things to come.

I’ll probably delete it soon. I feel uncomfortable sharing this but wanted some thoughts if anyone cares to share.

[Forgotten_Charity]

nibbler wrote:

Shawn wrote:

Well, it’s been 100 degrees here in Salt Lake!

It’s a dry heat.

But seriously though. Some areas get up to 100 degrees with about 45% humidity. Or even 80 degrees with 80% humidity… you can toss the heat index out the window because sometimes that 80/80 can be worse. Sweat doesn’t evaporate and there’s no cooling effect.

Not that this is a “who has it worse” competition or anything. :angel:

There are some places including a lot where I spend my time in that get to 100-130F, 60-100 humidity and 70-84 dew point.

I spend slot of time searching for and testing different clothing.

Rayon(hopefully a garment will be made from that and reversible fabrics to reverse when it gets soaked will also be used latter in garments. But for now the primary focus is on the outer clothing until they send time consulting athletic and work clothing manufactures for extreme environments. Not a problem fora my people but for those that do face them a very big concern is clothing material.

[Forgotten_Charity]

Quote:

rents are confronted with a fundamental but often difficult task: teaching children the values and regulations necessary to function effectively in society while also nurturing children’s drive to express themselves and to pursue their unique interests and capacities. The central socialization goal is internalization, wherein children “take in” social regulations, make them their own, and eventually self-regulate autonomously (e.g., Lepper, 1983; Schafer, 1968). When it functions optimally, internaliza- tion is beneficial for children’s learning, well-being, and psy- chosocial adjustment. However, because activities that need to be internalised are often not enjoyable (e.g., clean-up, home- work), adults wonder how to encourage children’s engagement in such tasks without negatively affecting their self- determination.

Self-determination theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985, 2000, 2008) uses the concept of innate, universal, psychological needs to understand human motivation. All human beings have the funda- mental needs to feel related, competent, and autonomous in order to develop and function optimally (Deci & Ryan, 2000) The paramount importance given to the need for autonomy is the core

Rather, autonomy is about volitional, harmonious, and integrated functioning, in contrast to more pressured, conflicted, or alienated. Self-determination theory suggests that children have an innate propensity toward mastery of their environment, and that the internalization of values, behaviours, and attitudes in the social surround is a spontaneous, natural process (Ryan, 1995).

Self-determination theory highlights the role of the social con- text, which can either facilitate or undermine children’s intrinsic motivation and internalization. Both intrinsic motivation and in- ternalization are likely to function optimally when children’s need for autonomy is supported by parents and teachers (Ryan & Deci, 2000a). It is not merely that children can develop well without external pressure and control: external pressure that goes against children’s developmental tendencies can actually have a negative effect on their development.

Self-determination theory is what I choose between authoritarian, authoritative, permissive, and self-determination.

I’m not sure how much this has been used or talked about in LDS families though. Anyone know of this or used this theory?

A small section if a 7 page extensive research study.

http://www.selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/2008_JoussemetLandryKoestner_CanPsych.pdf” class=”bbcode_url”>http://www.selfdeterminationtheory.org/SDT/documents/2008_JoussemetLandryKoestner_CanPsych.pdf

[Forgotten_Charity]

On Own Now wrote:

Hey, everyone, I’m just stopping by to say “thanks” for your kind remarks. I’m very grateful to have found this community for the peace it has brought to me. I wish you all well.

-On Own Now

May peace be with you and love emanate around you On own now. I hope you find and continue what you are looking for from life. Thanks for your contributions.

[Forgotten_Charity]

Roy wrote:

But I don’t let it bother me (too much). Part of my strategy for this is to supplement my spirituality from outside sources. There is a place for works in a healthy life. When that place begins metastasizing and cannibalizing the other components of my life, I know that it is time to drink from a different well of thought for a while.

Yes, thank you for that reminder. We have a tendency to feel a want for a one stop shop approach many times(myself included). To fight against this tendency and be ok with shopping around for what works best for each individual is the real challenge and courage in life since it takes so much more energy and thought to work through it then a one stop shop approach.

[Forgotten_Charity]

Hi willb1993. This one is a tough one for me because while I am pretty tolerant for social injustice for myself I am not so with others around me and dot best to equalize the the social structure. I’ve spent life doing just this. However as Ray pointed out it dwells in quite a few places. I remember as a kid being part of a cool club, but after realizing some people who we’re nice couldn’t join because they weren’t cool I left the club to form my own that anyone could join so they could be part of something. I think that still is key, try not worrying about what they are doing and create your own life world with more equal social justice. Don’t focus on what they are doing, focus on what you can do to make things better. I am probably a hypocrite because I allow a lot of stuff to negatively be done to me that I don’t tolerate happening to others but be that as it may I can’t sit back and watch it happen. The key is to focus on what you can do. You don’t have to interact with others that make you feel uncomfortable. You can make your own world of equal social justice, friends, clubs and sic social events to set an example. But again you have no control over what others do. If something is particularly offensive and hurtful to others you can pull people up on tiger behavior and go on about your business.

You can choose to join sociology classes or clubs to discuss these things and develop better ideas or to create a more equal society and the rules and laws needed for such if you are really interested. If not then you can just ignore the stuff and be involved with your own hobbies and join clubs that gather together for them.

Exclusivity and scarcity breed commitment for belonging to a select “tribe”.

It’s something human that one day hopefully we will evolve out of. The need to be part of a select group that is select or rare. As it doesn’t add anything of value to the human race besides breeding commitment to that group which isn’t really of value to society as a whole.

Quote:

In 1975, researchers Worchel, Lee, and Adewole wanted to know how people would value cookies in two identical glass jars. One jar held ten cookies while the other contained just two stragglers. Which cookies would people value more?

Though the cookies and jars were identical, participants valued the ones in the near-empty jar more highly. Scarcity had somehow affected their perception of value.

There are many theories as to why this was the case. For one, scarcity may signal something about the product. If there are less of an item, the thinking goes, it might be because other people know something you don’t. Namely, the cookies in the almost empty jar are the num-numier choice.

It’s About Context

Classical economic theory starts with two key assumptions: First, consumers are armed with “perfect information.” Second, people behave rationally. However, in the real world, these two conditions are more the exception than the rule. In fact, marketers do their best to trigger cognitive quirks, like the scarcity heuristic, to influence behavior.

Even though it may make no objective difference regarding what is actually being sold, marketers know context matters just as much as the product itself. The near-empty jar with just two cookies left in it conveys valuable (albeit irrelevant) information.

For another example of the importance of context, consider what happened when the world-class violinist Joshua Bell decided to play a free impromptu concert in the Washington, DC subway. Bell regularly sells-out venues like the Kennedy Center and Carnegie Hall for hundreds of dollars per ticket. But placed in the context of the DC subway, his music fell upon deaf ears. Almost nobody knew they were walking past one of the most talented musicians in the world.

When Bell gave away his concert for free, few stopped to listen. But when he charges beaucoup bucks, his music becomes a rarefied commodity and thousands of people pay-up.

Interesting how the perceived value changes in people huh? Not the actual value but the perceived value.

The problem is with people’s perception, conditioned since tribal times to value something more if it’s exclusive or scarce.

Hopefully we can leave that behind us one day. But for now most people have it as string as ever because of the natural additional chemical release when something becomes harder to work for or scarcer and exclusive. Even if the actual value didn’t change and just the perceived value. Like a rare wine or artifact that is valued highly but when found out to be a forgery it value becomes nothing. Marketeers and all organization of diffident size are keenly aware of this to breed commitment to their brand or org. Club.

Just so you understand what’s at play. For most it’s a natural biological thing that has been around since tribal times.

At the heart of all this is ego manifesting as pride as it does.

The argument is therefore the perception on weather the ego(pride) is earned or not. The perception of being or earning more then others because the perception of self or others feels it is.

[Forgotten_Charity]

Another sign this, in the worst children’s book I have ever read. Teaches this to primary kids. I didn’t know what a toxic children’s book was till I read this. Eek, way out of line. We can do better.

Quote:

One of Jesus’ most transformative insights is that spirituality is an inside job. At a time when righteousness was equated with exact observance of rules, Jesus taught that God is concerned not so much with our actions as with the motivations behind them. There are only two commandments, and they are both love.

What, then, is the role of works? Paul teaches that loving intentions [footnote: I mean here true intentions, not the kind of weak intentions that are little more than a wish] will naturally result in good works. But it is dangerous to focus on works at the expense of love, because even the greatest works are spiritually meaningless without love. 1 Cor. 13:1-3.

This is wonderful theology but an administrative nightmare, because love is difficult to measure. A system that finds it necessary to assess the spiritual worthiness of individuals will almost inevitably fall back on works because they are concrete and measurable. Either you have paid your tithing or you haven’t. Only God can know whether you paid your tithing out of love, so human administrators gradually lose interest in intentions altogether. Focusing only on correct actions, we find ourselves back with the Pharisees.

This, of course, is the current state of the Mormon church. We give constant lip service to Christ’s atonement, but our highest aspiration is never to come within a hundred feet of it. If only we can prevent people from performing wrong actions, we think, they can return safely to heaven, untouched by the world and I would add, untouched by Christ’s grace.

This clearly is the view of Wendy Watson Nelson, author of the new Deseret Book publication, The Not Even Once Club, “an adorable and appealing . . . story that will help [children] choose for themselves to keep the commandments and to never break them. Not even once.” (http://deseretbook.com/Not-Even-Once-Club-Wendy-Watson-Nelson/i/5097848)

In the book, Tyler, a boy who is new in his ward, is invited to a kids’ clubhouse filled with candy and games supplied by the kids’ Primary teacher, Sister Croft. Tyler gains entrance to the club only by passing a test of ordering lemonade rather than coffee, tea, or alcohol at an imaginary restaurant and promising never to “break the Word of Wisdom, lie, cheat, steal, do drugs, bully, dress immodestly, or break the law of chastity. Not. Even. Once.”

The problem with Sister Nelson’s book is that it is evil. Satan wanted to shepherd everyone to heaven by coercing us to perform correct actions, regardless of our intentions. Version 2.0 of Satan’s plan replaces hard coercion with soft coercion: a lonely Tyler agrees to obey the commandments so he can be accepted into a group, and the other kids get “jars of pretzels and popcorn and candy” from Sister Croft “as long as we keep the promise.” (Sister Croft will surely buy each of the kids a car if they go an a mission, too.)

Missing from this story is the central element of Christ’s teaching and atoning sacrifice: love. What if Tyler wants to follow the commandments because he loves other people so much that he would not want to hurt them by lying, cheating, stealing, or bullying? What if Tyler chooses to live the Word of Wisdom and the law of chastity because he loves God and wants to show his gratitude for God’s gift of a body?

Perhaps the gospel is not about avoiding “stains” of the world, but about filling ourselves with a love so powerful that it transforms our very being, changing us from selfish wretches into people who will give our lives to our precious sisters and brothers and to that God whose love lights the whole world. The reward for this kind of dedication is not pretzels and candy or a mess of pottage, but the realization of our own divine nature.

Then there is the standard of perfect obedience to commandments. This is, of course, a doctrinal impossibility. Romans 3:23. But it also has serious psychological repercussions. Richard Beck writes [http://experimentaltheology.blogspot.com/2013/05/elizabeth-smart-and-psychology-of.html] that we tend to think of sin in one of two ways. We sometimes use the food-based metaphor of purity in which a person, like food, becomes permanently contaminated by sin. Or we use metaphors of mistake or stumbling, in which we correct our errors or pick ourselves up and continue on.

Beck notes that Christians generally use the purity metaphor only for sexual sins (loss of female virginity in particular), but Sister Nelson applies it here to all sins. Even a single sin breaks the promise and leads to expulsion from the club (and loss of candy!). This book does not anticipate failure or provide guidance when a child inevitably sins. [footnote: In the parent’s guide at the end of the book, in tiny print, there is a section on repentance. It comes right after a paragraph urging exact obedience.] One of Satan’s great tactics is to cause people to believe that Christ’s atonement does not exist, that they are permanently irredeemable. This book plays into that thinking, setting children up for shame and humiliation.

As it turns out, mistakes are not only inevitable but are necessary for growth. There is some scriptural evidence of a positive correspondence between the magnitude of our mistakes and our potential for growth. Jesus taught that the debtor who owes the most is the most grateful when the debt is forgiven. Luke 7:36-50. Jonah jumped ship, Peter denied Christ three times, Paul persecuted the faithful, and Alma the Younger seems to have committed every single sin on Sister Nelson’s list. [footnote: There is no word yet on the availability of narcotics during Book of Mormon times or whether Alma the Younger wore an off-the-shoulder tunic.] Not a single one of these prophets—or any prophet, or Sister Nelson, or any human being—comes anywhere close to the Not Even Once Club. The purity standard is not only impossible; it prevents us from growing to become like God.

What I wish with all my heart to tell Tyler is that God loves him no matter what. God’s love is the very air in which we live, and move, and have our being. The only suitable thanks for such an incomprehensible gift is to embody it, to reflect that love back to God and to all of God’s children. That love is its own reward. There is no other test or prize. There are no ruined flowers or licked cupcakes. There is simply One whose heart swells wide as eternity with love. That is the only story worth telling.

http://rationalfaiths.com/satans-plan-2-0-deseret-book-edition/” class=”bbcode_url”>http://rationalfaiths.com/satans-plan-2-0-deseret-book-edition/

First time I have ever deny the need to ban a book from my house.

[Forgotten_Charity]

As an aside, my wife who is a TBM women I love dearly but not American sees this not as a gospel thing but an American culture thing that Americans and American authority are obsessed with. She sees it distinctly in that light and not as a gospel topic. She hates that part of our culture with a passion even while being very TBM. Because it wasn’t emphasized in the church where she grew up. She sees it as an American cultural attitude she hates to death. It’s interesting but the Lego movie has become very popular amount those I know who have grown up in this type of culture, even outside of America to many of my friends HK or japan.

[Forgotten_Charity]

Quote:

Obedience and Authority

Obedience is compliance with commands given by an authority figure. In the 1960s, the social psychologist Stanley Milgram did a famous research study called the obedience study. It showed that people have a strong tendency to comply with authority figures.

Milgram’s Obedience Study

Milgram told his forty male volunteer research subjects that they were participating in a study about the effects of punishment on learning. He assigned each of the subjects to the role of teacher. Each subject was told that his task was to help another subject like himself learn a list of word pairs. Each time the learner made a mistake, the teacher was to give the learner an electric shock by flipping a switch. The teacher was told to increase the shock level each time the learner made a mistake, until a dangerous shock level was reached.

Throughout the course of the experiment, the experimenter firmly commanded the teachers to follow the instructions they had been given. In reality, the learner was not an experiment subject but Milgram’s accomplice, and he never actually received an electric shock. However, he pretended to be in pain when shocks were administered.

Prior to the study, forty psychiatrists that Milgram consulted told him that fewer than 1 percent of subjects would administer what they thought were dangerous shocks to the learner. However, Milgram found that two-thirds of the teachers did administer even the highest level of shock, despite believing that the learner was suffering great pain and distress. Milgram believed that the teachers had acted in this way because they were pressured to do so by an authority figure.

Factors That Increase Obedience

Milgram found that subjects were more likely to obey in some circumstances than others. Obedience was highest when:

Commands were given by an authority figure rather than another volunteer

The experiments were done at a prestigious institution

The authority figure was present in the room with the subject

The learner was in another room

The subject did not see other subjects disobeying commands

In everyday situations, people obey orders because they want to get rewards, because they want to avoid the negative consequences of disobeying, and because they believe an authority is legitimate. In more extreme situations, people obey even when they are required to violate their own values or commit crimes. Researchers think several factors cause people to carry obedience to extremes:

People justify their behavior by assigning responsibility to the authority rather than themselves.

People define the behavior that’s expected of them as routine.

People don’t want to be rude or offend the authority.

People obey easy commands first and then feel compelled to obey more and more difficult commands. This process is called entrapment, and it illustrates the foot-in-the-door phenomenon.

Having grown up my entire life around authoritarian figures, family and other wise; I have spent the rest of my time trying to understand both why I would do things I never would normally do and others as well.

I’ve come along way and while co-operation is paramount in any society obedience with exactness is an example of a society that went horribly wrong with ethics. Mostly because there is no positive value in it as a whole system of life approach. Second because it has very serious negative emotional consequences.

It is the racer oppositely autonomous, becoming and inoculation to becoming an automaton. I was not able to inwardly feel emotion the more I surrendered my will to others with exactness, because I couldn’t feel like a human being(after all obedience with exactness is what automaton or robots are for. But not animals much less humans.

I final scope I can understand how and why it takes place now. But a life with obedience with exactness is no life at worth anything at all. I would rather have all the self learning and exploring and trying to find what’s right on my own by my own experience and by meta data studies then get blessing of all the world and universe combined and sacrifice that for them.

It highlights what it means to live and love a life worthwhile. Something Thomas Jefferson knew well. As did the Haitians and others. When I hear such things I just laugh now, make a joke on the inside and reframe it to something far more healthy –Co-operation of society to get things done. A relationship of give and take based in both needs.

[Forgotten_Charity]

It’s been a struggle during the spring and summer in the hot and humid area i live especially once the dew point gets past 70. Ive gone from bot seating hardly since the endowment to 3 changes a day because if sweat. Cotten, Corbin, mesh, and the ones I refuse to wear anymore –the dreaded extra support- worse them bicycle shorts.

Cotten–too itchy–makes skin even dryer and more itchy , Corbin to hot but feels better, mesh works ok but still needs changing a few times a day, extra support– your own personal sauna, complete with movement regulation.

I’ve worn better, but at a cost of $20-40. Hope there are better options in the future for hot and humid places.

[Author]

Posts