[Watcher]

SilentDawning wrote:

The thing that gives me some comfort about this is that in the next life, we get perfect bodies. And for a while, awaiting resurrection, we are purely spiritual beings. This means any deficiencies in our biological makeup that contribute to unhappiness are a non-issue. So, taking meds in this life for happiness due to biological reasons doesn’t put me at a disadvantage in the next life — assuming the problems are truly biological.

What about this though — I was reading The How of Happiness by a famous Stanford psychology researcher named Sonja LYUBOMIRSKY. She said that 50% of our happiness is genetic, 10% is due to circumstances (a figure I thought was pretty low — think about a paraplegic, for example), and 40% of happiness is something we can control.

I have often wondered if God will censure us for not controlling our thoughts within the 40% range, using meds to handle that part of it, perhaps by influencing the 50% genetic part instead. I hope not.

Also, if HE does mention this to me, I would probably ask, respectfully, what else could be done given the fact that I’d seen cognitive therapists and tried pretty hard throughout my life to be happy within the 40% of influence I had. And that only led to frustration. Then point to the fact that I was much happier after the meds took over.

I am glad you have asked questions, but I must apologize because I have no definitive answer. I am not sure there is a definitive answer that works even on the majority that ask this question. I have medications that I take for high blood pressure. I have competed (amateur level) in sports my entire life and have a resting heart rate in the mid 50’s. Most high blood pressure meds slow one’s heart rate, so I have to take a cocktail of meds.

I invested in a great deal of research and even the science is not clear in this matter. Part of the problem is that because of individual genetics, very few individuals have balanced biological chemistry. We all have various genetic advantages and disadvantages. The purpose for taking meds is to help correct imbalances in our individual biological chemistry. The problem with taking meds is that our science and technology is not advanced enough to balance the meds we take with our individual biological chemistry. The buzz word for unbalanced meds is “side effects”.

But there is another problem. If someone (like myself) is taking a minimum of 5 individual meds there is a statistical probability that two of the meds will unbalance each other and produce additional uncharted side effects. In addition, if someone (like myself) takes an occasional aspirin, Advil or Tylenol for injuries or something for a cold or flue or even a shot for shingles or some other problem – any of which can have additional effects because of my meds and genetic biological chemistry.

All this means that I must make choices and in some cases none of my options are to my liking or with sufficient information that I can make and intelligent choice. Now you have asked how G-d fits into all this. I will give you, my opinion. I think such is all part of his plan for our mortal experience. I had an engineering professor in college that gave us a final of 10 problems and a week to complete the final examine. We could use any resource at our disposable – even team up with other class members but what we did not know was that 7 of the problems had no known solution. I think G-d is somewhat like that college professor. That he gives us unsolvable problems – not for his amusement but more as a challenge for us to learn both to deal with our problems with all we have learned and to also discover for ourselves how we respond when we run out of options.

[Watcher]

PazamaManX wrote:

Watcher wrote:

My point in this is that it makes no sense to me when someone complains that the church is too authoritarian in one breath and then complains in the next breath that members are somewhat hypocritical in what they say and do. This looks like a reality disconnect to me. If the church is authoritarian – how is it possible so many members are behaving and saying stuff that is out of line from what the church teaches???

I do think calling the church ‘authoritarian’ is a bit extreme. There are certainly better examples of authoritarians out there. But, I have known church leaders who were high on their own power.

There was one stake presidency I had in particular who had a pretty nasty “what we says goes” mentality. They would frequently squash discussions with them that went against how they wanted things done. Granted, that stake president was a former chief of police, so that’s how he was used to leading. But, it still angered a lot of people in the stake.

The church also does tend to expect a lot of subservience from its members, which it usually gets.

Watcher wrote:

For me there is logic to everything. My wife tells me that there are very few things that are logical – but she is unable to give me any examples of something real that is not logical.

I agree, pretty much everything has logical reasons for it. If something is illogical, it’s usually because all of the variables aren’t known. But I do think there are some things that can be beyond the ability to explain logically. Particularly emotions and desires.

A personal example: I have a huge phobia of wasps and hornets; both black and yellow, stinging insects. I also have a strange desire to get into beekeeping; also a black and yellow stinging insect. And I don’t even really like honey. Without some serious psychoanalysis, my urge to take care of thousands of bees appears very illogical.

Watcher wrote:

As much as I would like to be or think otherwise – in over 76 years of experience and with all my effort – the bless them that curse you thing — I have not made much progresss. My father and my mother could do that and a few others I have known (my wife included and a couple of general authorities I have know personally). I am not sure I can figure it out before I die – hopefully begging for mercy will help – it is about all I have left as hope in such things.

I’m not as far along as you are, but I also can say that I haven’t had much success with figuring that one out. The best I can do is ‘ignore them that curse you’. I have a long way to go to before I get to ‘bless them’.

I have thought about our exchanges as well as what others have posted and hope to clarify a couple of things. Please, if I seem critical it is not intended. In this world the single thing or negative principle I have the most difficulty with is an individual that is a micromanager. I am an individual that does not deal with micromanagement. I have experienced leaders (and members) in the church that are micromanagers. What I would make clear is that micromanagement is not taught in the LDS church as a desired leadership skill. All the micromanagers I have encountered in the church have acquired and honed such skills outside of what the church teaches.

I have learned from sad experience that confronting a micromanager in a group setting is never beneficial and it does not matter if they are present or not. The only method I have found any success, is in directly dealing with the micromanager in private. I also see micromanagement as a spectrum and not something with a fine very distinct boundary. At one side of the spectrum, I see the tendency to isolate someone on their own without any support. At the other end of the spectrum, I see the tendency to demand step by step exactly what is acceptable to be done without any deviation.

I have also learned that the circumstance in which one is operating in, needs to be considered. A great lesson I acquired while in the military was that there are times to push back and times to look past the micromanagement and just put all my effort into completing the task as described. I have also learned that there are two types of micromanagers (also somewhat of a spectrum). One will listen to criticism – take such into account – and then work towards an amicable solution. The other extreme is to become angry and blow up at any criticism. As a side note here – I have learned that responding with anger to anything will seldom, if ever, produce anything of benefit – not just in relationships but even more importantly in any self-achievements. Getting angry or a desire to get even or revenge destroys more of what I value in myself than any possible benefit realized concerning anyone else. I have also learned that misdirected anger is the worst kind of anger – all with the most harm towards those most angry and is a catalyst for more destructive anger.

My experience is that if there is any possibility of learning self-character improvement and finding reconciliation with others – it is in what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches. I think it is in harmony with what Jesus once said – “In the world you will have tribulations but be of good cheer for I have overcome the world”.

The best way I have found to improve any relationship with anyone else is to deal with them directly and honestly express my concerns but most importantly express my desire to improve things and then to think and behave is if I just made a friend. I do realize that there are always exceptions but even the occasional exceptions I have encountered (and I have experienced rare exceptions among the Latter-day Saints) the only way I can forgive both them and myself is to forgive them and mean no harm. I have not perfected this and am still a work in progress. If there is anything that works better – I have not encountered such yet. But I am open to any suggestions.

[Watcher]

DarkJedi wrote:

Watcher wrote:

I am thinking that perhaps you should be the example to others to help them understand what they are missing. I wish I had your kind of insights. For me, I know that it is taught that we should love everyone but I have great difficulty loving anyone that I do not like very much. I could really use some insights and a good example from someone that understands such things.

I think love can be either an emotion or an action (or sometimes both). You sort of answered your own question. Love as an action would be doing the service project for someone you don’t like very much, and since you said you sign up for all service projects it would seem this has probably happened. One doesn’t have to like someone to love them in this way.

Quote:

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you

Thank you for your effort. As much as I would like to be or think otherwise – in over 76 years of experience and with all my effort – the bless them that curse you thing — I have not made much progresss. My father and my mother could do that and a few others I have known (my wife included and a couple of general authorities I have know personally). I am not sure I can figure it out before I die – hopefully begging for mercy will help – it is about all I have left as hope in such things.

[Watcher]

nibbler wrote:

Watcher, I think you may have misread or misinterpreted my post or maybe I wasn’t clear. I didn’t claim that the church teaches people bad behaviors nor did I say I was angry.

Watcher wrote:

I have never heard anyone (member or leader) ever teach at the LDS church that anyone should ever embrace greed, hatred, spite, vindictiveness, divisiveness, dishonesty, combativeness, etc. If anyone practices such behaviors, I am sure they did not learn it at church.

People may have picked up those behaviors elsewhere or it may just be a part of human nature, it doesn’t matter. My question is why isn’t the church addressing the problem more directly? Like it or not, the problem is here. What do we do about it?

My call out about the “Mormon” church was to juxtapose what’s important enough for the leaders to address during general conference with what I feel are more weightier matters.

It’s not fair to say weightier matters go unaddressed, leaders do address the problems I mentioned but it’s interesting to me how many members’ takeaway from conference is to start getting angry when other people say the word Mormon, not even in the context of talking about the church, just the word in general. Some people’s takeaway from conference is to become angry about one more thing (other people saying the word Mormon) and to be divisive and confrontational (start policing others over using the word).

We heard the talk to not say Mormon. We heard the talk saying it’s not a big deal. We heard the second talk to not call it the Mormon church. We even heard a third talk on it not being negotiable. I guess I’d like at least one ore two more talks on not being jerks to others that say Mormon to counterbalance.

In general we need a lot more “quit being jerks” talks during conference.

I think I may understand in some small part what you are talking about. I have great difficulty understanding just about everybody. My dear wife is always telling me that I think and see the world differently than everyone else. For me there is logic to everything. My wife tells me that there are very few things that are logical – but she is unable to give me any examples of something real that is not logical.

When I listen to conference, and we have one coming up in a few weeks, I try to relate everything that is said to me personally. I do not know that much about everybody else. So when it is said that the term “Mormon” should be used less – I think to myself – this is something very easy that I can do. And in truth – I find it about the easiest thing of all the things presented at conference. I am most happy to comply and support anyone else in their efforts.

There are lots of other things talked about and recommended at conference that are not so easy for me. I do not love very many people. I assume others have similar difficulties, so I do not want to be critical or complain about much. I am likely one of those members you reference that is having problems with the important things. I have so many problems with myself and being compassionate to others – I really cannot complain how others treat me. This is because I have discovered that often I am misunderstood or something else is going on that I do not know anything about. Since I do not understand much concerning others – I really cannot respond well to how others are treating each other. My wife is very often telling me to be less blunt and filter things I say to others. This is so confusing because I am just attempting to understand and make things clear. Actually, I find most misunderstandings to be somewhat comical but any such suggestion that something is kind of funny is seldom helpful. And yet most comedy in entertainment is built on that premises.

I know I am not doing so well of an example on this forum. I have not been here long and yet I have been reminded several times I am not being very helpful. Obviously, there are many others here that understand life much better than me and can communicate it better. I am somewhat out of touch because I do not connect that well with whatever is the problem. I am quite happy to be a member of the church and try as I will to be helpful to others – what works great for me and I find to be wonderful does not seem to be helpful for others. Sorry I do not understand why or how to figure out anyone but myself.

[Watcher]

PazamaManX wrote:

nibbler wrote:

I mentioned this in the other post. The church doesn’t really do a good job of teaching people correct principles anymore. The church is more concerned with teaching members to obey authority figures. The principle being taught is to embrace authoritarianism.

This has been one of my bigger complaints for awhile now. I can’t remember the last lesson or talk that taught something resembling a moral principle. In my ward at least, most of what I hear is how great it is that we have the plan of salvation and a prophet to listen to. I mean, that’s fine and all, but it would be nice to hear about something that makes you a better human being.

Watcher wrote:

I have never heard anyone (member or leader) ever teach at the LDS church that anyone should ever embrace greed, hatred, spite, vindictiveness, divisiveness, dishonesty, combativeness, etc. If anyone practices such behaviors, I am sure they did not learn it at church.

I haven’t heard anything like that intentionally taught either. My personal complaint, is that I feel the opposite of those things, stuff like contentment, unity, honesty and peace aren’t taught enough. I do hear a fair bit about loving one another, but it seldom goes deeper than platitudes.

At least that is the experience I’ve had in my own ward and some other local wards around where I live. Perhaps there are wards out there that discuss things that are more along the lines of what I’m looking for.

Thanks for your efforts to try to help me understand. Mostly likely I am among those that you are trying to point out. I do not know if someone is having a problem unless they say there is a problem. My wife seems to understand how others are feeling. To be honest I have great difficulty when someone talks about feelings. I personally do not understand the term love. When Jesus said we need to love our enemies – I have no idea what that means.

I do understand service and helping others. I make it a point to volunteer for all service projects or whenever someone asks for assistance. I have discovered that with few exceptions (there always seem to be exceptions) that those involved in service, especially at ward levels, are the same individuals that are quite a small minority of the ward family. And there is very little, or nothing, done by leaders in authority to enforce service. I spent two years in the army and so I believe I have a very good idea what it is like to live under authoritarian control. I also served two years as a missionary – which I believe is the closest that our church gets to authoritarian control and I believe I can say with authority that the church is anything but authoritarian. On my exit interview for my mission, my second mission president surprised me by telling me I was one of his most difficult missionaries to deal with. I asked him what he asked of me that I did not do. He responded that I did what I was asked but I always pushed the limits. Pushing limits is too vague for me to understand. I had no idea what he was talking about and had no problem telling him so. What is interesting is that this mission president and I got along very well later in life.

My point in this is that it makes no sense to me when someone complains that the church is too authoritarian in one breath and then complains in the next breath that members are somewhat hypocritical in what they say and do. This looks like a reality disconnect to me. If the church is authoritarian – how is it possible so many members are behaving and saying stuff that is out of line from what the church teaches???

I am thinking that perhaps you should be the example to others to help them understand what they are missing. I wish I had your kind of insights. For me, I know that it is taught that we should love everyone but I have great difficulty loving anyone that I do not like very much. I could really use some insights and a good example from someone that understands such things.

[Watcher]

nibbler wrote:

Over the last several years I have witnessed too many members of the church embrace greed, hatred, spite, vindictiveness, divisiveness, dishonesty, combativeness, etc. as if they were Christlike principles. Then when I watch general conference, what does the prophet say? That calling the church the Mormon church is a major victory for Satan. That’s the major victory for Satan? That?

So the Sunday after conference what do I hear in church? Do I hear my community talking about the dangers of anger, hatred, and violence against people with differing opinions? No, I hear some guy going off on how it’s no longer acceptable to say Mormon. So now we’ve got yet another thing to be angry over. Great.

I mentioned this in the other post. The church doesn’t really do a good job of teaching people correct principles anymore. The church is more concerned with teaching members to obey authority figures. The principle being taught is to embrace authoritarianism.

I have never heard anyone (member or leader) ever teach at the LDS church that anyone should ever embrace greed, hatred, spite, vindictiveness, divisiveness, dishonesty, combativeness, etc. If anyone practices such behaviors, I am sure they did not learn it at church. Actually, I have attended many churches and places of religion and I have never heard such things taught in any religious place. Perhaps you could provide a religious place where you think such things are taught so I can go and verify this for myself.

If such things are not taught at church – why are you so against doing as the “authorities” in church teach? The principle I hear the most often taught in every religious place I have experience (and especially in the LDS church); is that we should love one another and treat others as we would have them treat us.

As for how we address others? If their official and legal name or title is desired – why should that make anyone angry??? Why does it make you angry? If I understand – perhaps I can avoid making you angry.

[Watcher]

How can I respond to this thread and not offend someone? I grew up in a very political family. My father was adamant that our family should support only one of the political parties in our country. His reasoning was that as a prominent member of a particular political party could contact their representative and have some respect and influence. It is sadly true that ordinary citizens that wright letters to their representatives are not respected unless they have strong party connections. And so I was raised to be a card carrying member of the Republican party.

Shortly after my mission, I worked on and was a major individual contributing to republican running for a state office in Utah. It became very evident that this good church member was not just politically corrupt but was involved in criminal activity. I did all I could to rectify what was going on and ended up with more problems than those committing the offences – which interestingly included vote tampering.

I became very upset and left the republican party forever and moved out of Utah. In this country the only other viable option is the democratic party. I moved to the DC. Area and tried to become an influential democrat. I discovered that the democratic party to be exponentially more corrupt than the republicans. All this took place 45 years ago. I personally refuse to support either political party or candidate in any way shape of form. As a result, I am somewhat despised by both the so-called liberals and conservatives which each now are the polar opposite of their initial definition.

I am pleased beyond measure that the Church is not politically active in the USA nor does the church support any political party or candidate in the USA. It is my personal opinion that those that think the Church is not involved in issues are quite ill-informed and naive. I believe the church follows the advice of Joseph Smith – that it teaches correct principles and allows people to govern themselves – with the exception of some that think it is their job to govern whoever they can.

It seems to me, especially in the current political climate, that taking any stand on any issues requires the demonization of any and all that oppose it. I know many good and saintly individuals that are republicans and many that are democrats. I do not know any political or news commentator that can speak with respect of individuals that voted for political rivals. I fear this country is headed for another civil war and I do not intend to pick a side – nor do I believe that the church should pick a side either. Someone is going to have to pick up the pieces when it is over – hopefully with love and compassion.

[Watcher]

InquiringMind wrote:

A journal is a good thing, and I have quite an extensive journal that I’ve kept for a long time. I also think of those anomaloies in my life, and about their meaning, and about whether or not they are supernatural in any way, or whether they are just produced by my own unconscious mind. They do clearly seem to exist in my life, but I can’t say for sure where they come from or what they mean. For whatever they are worth and whatever they mean, I can’t say that they corroborate any stories about gold plates.

Greetings again: Perhaps the thought of a journal was not quiet what I meant – perhaps a logbook would be more in line of what I was thinking. What it is called does not matter. I keep impressions thoughts and a record of what seems important at the time. I kept records of my work and ideas as well. I have always stayed active in the church and I keep records of my thoughts of various doctrines and things learned from callings and experiences. I often surprise myself in how much my thinking and beliefs have evolved over time. I suggest you tailor such things to your liking.

Quote:

Many of these anomalies (as they might be called) do seem to take the form of manipulation of events – a phone call that was never returned, a sure-bet opportunity that mysteriously fizzled out at the last minute, a sudden change of plans, a door that suddenly closes, a rejection that eventually works out for the best, a surprise opportunity.

At this point I think it would be impossible for me to deny the existence of such events, and I might be willing to believe that there might be some overarching plan, perhaps a Divine plan. But still, I am actually quite unhappy with this plan and have never really been happy with it. I don’t have some of the things in life I want most, seemingly because they are not part of the overarching plan. I don’t have the free will go out and get the things I want because, as I have said, that isn’t the plan, apparently. I don’t have a bad life, but it’s also not the life I wanted, and it’s not a life that I really like all that much. The hope I have at this point is that there is some greater purpose to this, and that I’ll have a better life later on because of whatever it is I’m learning right now. Even if it’s true that there is a greater purpose to this and that I’ll have a better life later on, I am frustrated that I am not given any clear information on what that better life might be.

I realize that I did not complete several thoughts in my previous post. From my experience in creating test scripts and the purpose of testing – I have logically considered that our mortal existence is likely a result of our creation. Things created from a singular source are usually lacking diversity and are more standardized. Things more tailored to specific and unique things are of necessity more diverse. I have also become an advocate of “Agency”. In LDS doctrine agency was the singular point of contention in the pre-existence that cause a war between Satan and G-d that is still going on. Agency is in essence the doctrine that the individual has the power to choose their destiny and purpose. It seems logical to me that if a person intended to learn all concerning compassion that they would design their life to experience the extreme thresholds of compassion. Thus, I have concluded that if “Agency” exists it is more logical that our current experiences are based on our own design rather than something G-d is imposing upon us. I have found that there are extensions of this thought that are offensive to some religious thinkers.

Quote:

As for logic, I’m not opposed to faith as a principle, but I am unwilling to believe anything that is obviously wrong or that is clearly contradicted by good evidence. Whatever I believe, it has to make sense on some level, and I’m not willing to engage in a lot of wishful thinking and call it faith. I have gotten myself in trouble in the past when I continued to have “faith” in things that were contradicted by obvious reality, and it didn’t end well for me.

As for faith – I will give my impressions for what it is worth. I think of faith and logic as two different sides of the same coin that allows us to explore the possibilities of things that lack insufficient knowledge of what is or will be. I think of the logic of faith as something very akin to theatrical physics. I believe it best to start with the foundation of what we know and then considering what we experience, we project with the logic of faith to attempt to understand or come to some semblance of belief. For me this then is the purpose of discussing such things of religious nature or of faith – to test our logic in forming our understandings and beliefs. I am quite surprised when those of religious nature (or anyone for that matter) that become most upset if the logic of their beliefs are challenged in any way. I would much rather myself to deal with the embarrassment of congerring faulty logic than the years of trying to live up to something logically flawed that I was too irrationally flawed to realize.

[Watcher]

InquiringMind wrote:

Hi everyone. It’s been awhile since I’ve posted here. I’ve tried a few times to reconstruct a belief in the Church (after my initial faith crisis) and I’ve tried a few times to come back. I really miss the sense of community, and it’s actually quite difficult to find community outside of religion. So far I have not been able to make it work, as I have essentially been a secular atheist and my beliefs have been too far away from mainstream Mormonism.

Some recent events have given me reason to reconsider my secular atheism. I’m not sure what it all means yet, and I still don’t know if I will be able to make the Church work for me (as much as I’d like to make it work). But I at least would like to talk about it.

I feel as if my life is following some kind of predetermined plan, a plan that I am not allowed to know about in advance, nor do I have the power to change it. The plan seems to be non-negotiable, meaning that I cannot use my free will to choose a different path in life. The event that brought this to light for me has been a forced change of career direction – not forced by external circumstances, but by some cosmic (or perhaps internal) force that can’t be named. Specifically, I am am currently working at NASA as a scientist/engineer, and I had planned to stay there as a scientist/engineer for the rest of my career. But I am getting a very strong sense that I will not be allowed (by this cosmic force) to have a career as a scientist/engineer, and that after my current job appointment is over I need to leave my career as a scientist and go fly airplanes (I am already a private pilot with about 100 hours of flight time).

I am still quite angry about this because I did a lot of work to get my physics education, and being a scientist/engineer is usually a better career than being a pilot. I can become a flight instructor but I don’t know what I would do with my pilot credentials after that. But The Universe/God is being very clear with me – my destiny is something other than being a scientist/engineer and the next step in my life is to fly airplanes. Again, this is not a conscious choice on my part, as my own judgment would clearly tell me that staying in science/engineering is a better career move. But I have a sense that I am being pushed by some Higher Power to make the change.

This wouldn’t be so strange, except for the fact that this sort of thing has happened in my life several times and in several ways. It’s all enough to challenge my secular atheist worldview. There is definitely something more going on in my life than just my own conscious choices, and I’m not quite willing to accept the explanation that this “life plan” is all administered by my unconscious mind, because I think that’s giving my unconscious mind too much credit. I’m open to a broader explanation at this point, possibly involving the existence God, and perhaps some kind of pre-mortal agreement or contract about what I am supposed to accomplish in my life.

I’ve also been reading about near-death experiences and about children who remember past lives, and I find the evidence to be worth considering. I have never liked the idea of reincarnation, but some of the stories that some children tell about past lives they’ve lived are quite compelling, and the evidence is difficult to dismiss. Some people who have NDEs report that they did indeed make a pre-mortal contract with God about what they would accomplish in their lives. I’m not sure yet how all this fits into Mormonism, because at the institutional level, Mormonism puts a lot of emphasis on our conscious choices, and teaches that our destiny is whatever we choose it to be. It seems like the closest doctrine in Mormonism is foreordination, which does seem similar, though not quite the same.

Greetings InquiringMind: Thank you for your posting. I find many parallels in my life similar to yours. From a young age it seemed to me that too many factors beyond my control had impact in my life. This became most evident during my time in the army during the Vietnam era. My combat orders were suddenly changed while enroot to assignment with my company (186 Engineers) and I was assigned to a military intelligence unit (something I had no prior expertise or interest).

Following this military redirection, I started keeping a journal of notes whenever I encountered these life altering experiences that were outside my control. I would recommend you keep a similar journal of your experiences. I discovered that these anomalies always contributed to something I would need later in my life.

Similar to you my education was math and physics. After college I took employment with a software company and was quickly transferred to the east coast working for the defense department where I was forced into early stages of artificial intelligence. I struggled living on the east coast and looking for a change I went to work in Seattle. I ended up (because of security clearance) working on government contracts. I was put in charge of testing hardware and software. I discovered that the vast majority of testing, of necessity, needed to be at what I called extreme anomality thresholds. I was also the lead design engineer on the project.

Two aspects of my life are a strong relationship to both logic and to the restoration of the church. I have discovered that most (perhaps even a vast majority) of those connected to religion are somewhat resistant to logic – perhaps even somewhat being in opposition to employing logic. I find a lot of resistance to logic on this forum. Often when I refer to something being logical, especially in a religious setting, I find little support. For myself, I cannot understand or relate to anything until I can connect to the logic of it.

I sense that you are also one driven with logic. As you study your own life, I sense that you also expect some logic – including the meaning of life and religious understanding as well as things discovered in science. Perhaps we will exchange more ideas. I would hope so – at least to exchange with someone also trained in logic and reason; especially in dealing with extreme anomality thresholds.

[Watcher]

PazamaManX wrote:

Watcher wrote:

I posted this as a response previously but outside of suffering – what is it that we can get out of this life that we cannot get from any other experience in all of eternity? Again I do not want to discridit all the good things you are suggesting except to wonder if such thing cannot be learned outside of mortal life.

That’s a very good point, and I do see your logic. I agree that suffering is certainly a big component of life and that there is purpose in it. But, I personally stop short of saying it is THE purpose. That’s an idea I can see going off the rails if internalized the wrong way by the wrong person. It also isn’t the most comforting thought when you’re in the middle of the worst suffering that life has to offer (disease, death, etc.), as I mentioned earlier. It isn’t comforting for me at least.

Quote:

I am asking what is it we need to get our of our mortal existence that we cannot get with any other experience?

Perhaps this might be seen by some as a cop out or mentally lazy, but my answer is only He knows. We are all so different, as are our lives, and He knows and understands us better than we do ourselves. As I mentioned in your relationship with God thread, I’m content to trust He is in control of everything and only He knows the purpose. Pinning the complexity of life down into a single reason, or even a few reasons, for why we are here is a fruitless exercise for me.

All very good points. I believe and agree that we should take advantage of every experience we get in this life. I have done a lot of whitewater rafting, but I am getting old and trying to pass on what I have learned to others. I was training a new rafting guide for certification this summer (hopefully my last) because it is time for others to take over. I gave the new guide one particular opinion – that is – that regardless of whatever has happened, good or bad, the most important thing for them to focus on is to look down stream to prepare and get ready for what is coming next. I have found, for me, this work quite well for life in general.

I give one point of opinion to our discussion. I not sure that it is all that profitable to place everything at the feet of G-d or to blame him for all that happens. I do believe that we mortals are at a great disadvantage in understanding life and that G-d knows much more than we now do. But I have pondered that there was a pre-existence and that we – using our agency – planned out our lives and particularly the most difficult trials from which we could benefit the most. The operative word here is “could” benefit the most. And now we are becoming (experiencing) what we have intended for a very long time and G-d through his mercy is allowing it.

[Watcher]

Old-Timer wrote:

Also, on a more personal note as one of the founding administrators, there is no way to prove these things logically that will work universally. They can be proven to ourselves, if we need that to happen, but, in this forum, one of our core guiding principles is that we do not seek to prove our point of view to other participants at the expense of or in opposition to their points of view. We do not seek “the one True answer” about anything. We support each other, which I do for you in this case by accepting that your “proof” is a valid expression of your own perspective, but if you are attempting to prove to the participants here that you are right and they are wrong, you are working against our mission.

I would love to have you continue to be part of this community, but we cannot and will not allow participation that opposes our mission. Please understand that and decide if you can support our mission. If so, you are welcome here; if not, we wish you success and support in another forum that fits your own needs better.

I have discovered that life is much easier and more successful if one utilized the correct tool that is needed for a specific job. My purpose is to both provide and discover tools that can be used to navigate problems we discover and attempt to find resolution. There is an advertisement on TV where a person is working on a car and asks for a specific tool and is handed a feather. They proceed to try to fix the car with the feather.

I have also discovered that if one employs logic they will come to logical conclusions. These conclusions can be compared to others that think they have come to a logical conclusion. Logical conclusions most always converge and seldom diverge. My wonderful wife loves to watch a particular channel on TV (Hallmark) where two individuals always follow the same formatted path to love. One particular saying that is often used in these presented dramas is “I must follow my heart”. Personally, whenever I have attempted to follow such advice, it has proven to be illogical, diverse and ineffective. If my personal experiences seem critical it is because for me such things do not work so well. If other are offended at my learning from my failures – the failure is likely mine for expressing or communicating incorrectly. But this seems to be what the logical purpose of this forum is trying to do.

As for the forum – I personally am never (no longer) angered by discussions. Even if words are critical and intended to be slanderous towards me. The reason is that in my experience, getting upset over what someone else has said – has never been beneficial to me. Having learned and experience this simple lesson – I am somewhat confused when it is rejected rather than considered – but that is the right of every person. To listen and accept what they want and reject what they will.

I would bring one other thought to this discussion – The scientific definition of intelligence is the ability to learn and modify behavior. I personally like that definition even though it is not of my making. I am not saying that it is right and I can prove it. I am offering it as a tool and food for thought. Because I have included it in my opinions of intelligent things, I realize that others can learn and modify their initial intended purpose as well as I can learn and modify my initial intended purpose in posting if we are intelligent. Not that I am right – but as another possibility to consider.

[Watcher]

Roy wrote:

Hi Watcher,

I know that you are a strong believer in logic. I think that it is important to recognize that you have some significant assumptions before the logical thinking begins. Assumptions: 1) G-d exists 2) G-d created us 3) G-d is loving and merciful and would create a paradise for us to live in 4) Our lives are eternal. Fact: Our mortal experience is not a loving and merciful paradise. Logic rationalization: There might have been some sort of “fall” where the paradise world was lost and death began – but maybe paradise can be restored some day (perhaps we can enjoy it in the next life).

I am perfectly fine with assumptions. I have them too and I call it faith. I just think that it is important to recognize my assumptions to help me avoid the idea that if other people were more logical then they might arrive at the same conclusion as me.

Watcher wrote:

I understand you are an individual of authority in this forum. I am considering your suggestion that I no longer post on this forum and I am very thankful and intend to provide my best support while I am allowed to post.

We do not tend to prohibit people from participating in the forum as long as they can follow the rules and that their posts generally follow the mission of the StayLDS site. We are primarily a support group for people in faith crisis and an important part of that is through showing empathy and validation for their experiences.

I have come to realize that humans are unique and often in our communications we are ambiguous. When you say that this forum is primary a support group for people in faith crisis – that statement can mean many different things to many different people. In the Book of Mormon, the ancient prophet Moroni concludes his last remarks to the people of this day in Moroni chapter 10. This prophetic work cannot be to anyone else but those that live in our unique time that are the “last days”. He highlights his comments with the strong term “exhort” several times. His point is that each person that comes into this mortal life with spiritual gifts that can be utilized to uplift and support all people – including those that are or are not currently in a faith crisis.

This forum is also called “staylds” so I assume that LDS principles are at the foundations of religious understanding. This is why I reference them. Perhaps I have misunderstood what it means to support those in faith crisis. If support means to oppose all those that have faith in the L-rd Jesus Christ and the restoration of his church in these last days and do not consider themselves in faith crisis; then as a champion of latter-day revelations – I would logically be seen as contrary to such support. As an expert in logic and science – I see the greatest support to humanity to be truth and logic. I do not believe that truth and logic is possible with one and not the other. That one can only possess truth with logic and logic with truth.

At the same time, I am a champion of agency. That every individual has the right to determine their individual belief and how that knowledge can shape who and what they are. However, I do not believe that being stable in one’s beliefs is a faith crisis but rather the opposite of it. I believe that to exercise agency one must have knowledge and that agency is destroyed with lies and ignorance. I have also learned that in the scientific world the best means to explorer ideas and their value is through critical peer reviews. That just presenting the logic one employed to reach their conclusions is one of the best means I have experienced in arriving at the most useful conclusions. If this scientific method is contrary or seen as contrary support for people in faith crisis. I may not be seen or understood as support. If so I apologize and will not feel badly if asked to take my opinions elsewhere.

[Watcher]

nibbler wrote:

People can logic themselves into any position. For instance, I can use logic to show that one and two equals zero.

Different people can arrive at contrasting conclusions but I don’t think people on either side of a debate would see their own conclusion as being illogical.

I think what we call logic has more to do with remaining internally consistent within a limited framework. Just because someone can use internal consistency to show the logic of something in a limited framework doesn’t mean that something is universally true.

Watcher wrote:

I have never found proof that any exception to such definite statements would disprove the logic of any of them

Singling out one of your principles…

Something happens to someone. No real specific event, just any event you can imagine. You start with the premise that god won’t do anything to a person that isn’t beneficial to them.

It’s going to be difficult to find exceptions because you can always work your way backwards from the conclusion. Logic starts with assumptions and people have a very human need to preserve their assumptions. The assumptions provide the framework, the framework allows people to come up with predictable formulas, formulas help people make sense of the universe around them, formulas provide people with a sense of security, and logic is the glue that holds the whole thing together.

Say something really terrible happens to someone. You could say that god didn’t do the terrible thing, therefore it’s not an exception to the rule that god won’t do anything to a person that’s not beneficial to them. If believing that everything that happens is god’s will is a part of your framework, then logic might dictate that the really terrible thing that happened was actually beneficial to that person, just in a way they can’t yet recognize. Maybe it’s beneficial to the person by helping them overcome the trial.

Point being, logic makes lots of things true when working within a limited framework, logic is based on assumption, and we all have the tendency to work backwards from a conclusion.

As a mathematician I will tell you that I have delt with such logic as you have suggested and am confident to tell you in advance that such logic if deeply flawed. Usually, such flaws are constructed by using the logic for one type of number theory with another type of number theory. Most often this is done with mixing real and complex numbers.

I will attempt to explain what I have done with the 5 principles that define a logic structure by which we can realize that the relationship of G-d and man follows principles of logic. If we assume that G-d is both merciful and just – how can we create a structure of understanding? What is merciful and just is quite ambitious and has no means of metrics. I spent a lifetime as an engineer and scientist (now retired) and came to realize that if we have no means of observing and logically categorizing or cataloging our observations – we cannot say we understand or can utilize what we think we are observing.

What I have attempted to do is to provide that framework of logical principles form which someone can catalog and categorize their personal experiences with G-d. That is assuming that G-d is merciful, just and as Isaiah prophesied – that he makes his “secrets” known unto man (us).

Here are the principles relisted for convenience:

1G-d will not do for any person that which they can do for themself.

2. G-d will do for any person that which they cannot do for themself.

3. G-d will not do anything for or to any person, that which is not beneficial to them.

4. G-d will do anything for or to any person, that which is beneficial to them.

5. G-d will not do anything for or to any person without their acceptance and investment. (Agency)

Principles 1 and 3 reflect a metric for justice. Principles 2 and 4 reflect a metric for mercy. Principle 5 is a corresponding logical reflection of agency. None of the principles are intended to be applied separately but rather all used together in combination (as an aggregate only – never singularly) . As both as scientist and theologian I believe that we should utilize both disciplines in this time of restoration of knowledge to better understand our relationship with G-d.

I did not intend these to be the answer to all questions but rather to provide a structure anyone can use to navigate our spiritual and physical journey through mortality to both think critically now and have hope for what is to come.

[Watcher]

PazamaManX wrote:

Watcher wrote:

My first step in determining what possible intent all mortal life must experience – was to determine what every mortal must (regardless of all things possible) experience. In other words, what is the lowest common denominator for all mortals. As I listed in the initial post – I could only come up with two must happen experiences. The first is to obtain a physical body. The second is the experience of suffering pain and death.

That works for a minimum of what the purpose of life is. Though once your born, and you know you’re going to die at some point, that leaves you to figure out what the purpose is for the in between stuff.

I don’t agree that suffering is one of the purposes of life. There may be a point to it, and we can grow from it certainly. But I had the same thought as nibbler; just because everyone experiences it, I wouldn’t say that means it’s the purpose of why we’re here. Sure there is suffering, but not all of life is suffering. There are good experiences that don’t require any suffering to experience. Which is why my answer was what it was. Our lives are so varied, that if there is any purpose to it, only He knows.

Perhaps some of our experiences are for our benefit, maybe some are for the benefit of others. And maybe those who die as infants were those who didn’t need to experience anything in this life. Again, only He knows.

Watcher wrote:

As I thought on this subject – I had the thought the perhaps we should choose to learn to enjoy our trials and so I shared that thought. My wife was a little upset with this comment and said to me that it cannot be a trial if we are enjoying it.

I agree with your wife. In a similar vein, hearing comments at church where people say things like, “I always ask myself, ‘What can I learn from this trial?’ or ‘What is Heavenly Father trying to teach me?’.”, has always bothered me. Trying to have a detached view of trials may help with smaller stuff. But, I doubt anyone can do that at the death bed of loved one. The ability to do that would be psychopathic.

Watcher wrote:

Perhaps I should give a little background to how I was taught by my parents. A saying of my parents was that the secret of life is not achieving what you want but in learning to love doing the right things that will enviably bring or result in what you want. My father who was born poor ended up very wealthy would often have individuals come to him for advice on how to become wealthy. His answer was always the same and was a two-step process. The first step he said was to learn to love and enjoy hard work. Do not learn to endure work but to find joy in doing the tasks that others avoid. The truth is that if you cannot find joy in something – you will eventually quit doing it.

The second step is to learn to love taking a portion of your earning and investing it. He would tell people that if you cannot find joy in these two steps – you will never be happy. You will ether be unhappy because you “have to” work or you will be unhappy because you do not have enough money to do what you want and love doing.

That reminds me of the ’embrace the suck’ mentality you find in the military. It’s good for tough but beneficial things like exercise, work and investing. I try to incorporate that in my own life. But for things that are truly trying, things that hit you in your emotional core and there are no apparent benefits to it, that mentality falls short.

I posted this as a response previously but outside of suffering – what is it that we can get out of this life that we cannot get from any other experience in all of eternity? Again I do not want to discridit all the good things you are suggesting except to wonder if such thing cannot be learned outside of mortal life. I am asking what is it we need to get our of our mortal existence that we cannot get with any other experience?

[Watcher]

Roy wrote:

The biological imperative is to procreate. Thus the purpose of life is to create/perpetuate life.

Watcher wrote:

it is impossible to conclude that there is justice, mercy or any reason for hope.

I wouldn’t say that. There is justice and mercy and hope in our mortal lives and human institutions – just not perfect justice, perfect mercy, and perfect hope.

Watcher wrote:

When I finished school and obtained my first job in what I thought would be my life profession – I wanted to accomplish something important. Within two weeks I had solved a difficult problem and received a letter of commendation from the division manager. I was so excited I contacted my older brother (an exceptional individual that was officially believed to be a genius). He looked at the letter without reading it and asked if I received any money as a bonus? I told him I had not. He told me the put the letter in the trash because apparently it was not worth a cent to anyone else.

I have pondered that much of what many desire out of mortal life (especially praise from others) like my letter – really is not worth anything of real or lasting value. I wonder what others expect to get out of their mortal experience.

I think that to some, the commendation letter could have significant meaning. I have a friend that was employee of the month. He later had to stop working because of crippling anxiety. His post about winning the award came up on his facebook “memory” and I commented that the award was well deserved. He responded that it was the highlight of his life so far. If my friend’s life is more meaningful because of this award then that can only be a good thing (and far be it for me to minimize it in any way).

What has real or lasting value? For me the answer lies in relationships. When I die I hope to be rich in relationships. I believe that this is the moral behind the classic tale, “A Christmas Carol.”

I apologize for the late response. When I posted about the purpose of our mortal life, I was asking the question regarding what about our mortal life is necessary that we cannot get with any other experience in eternity. Obviously, I did not make that point clearly. I do not mean to criticize any of the things you have listed as important because the obviously are. What I intended to do is isolate what is critical and unique to our mortal life experience. And why other things that are important are important because of our understanding that there is meaningful intelligence outside of what we can decipher between what we experience between birth and death.

What you quoted from me about justice, mercy and hope left out a critical dimension. I implied that without any possibility of existence before birth and after death there is insufficient data considering mortal life only that justice, mercy and hope has any more benefit from humans than any other species that have existed on this planet. I purport that prior to the human species on earth – other life forms did just as well or better than with the advancements of intelligence concerning the matters of justice, mercy and hope that appears to me mostly a concern unique to the human species. This would also indicate that if the human species were to become extinct that other life on earth would and could thrive on their own without justice, mercy, or hope. Some even argued that perhaps the remaining species would be better off without any human intervention. I doubt than any other species would ever concern themselves with our human concern for commendations within our species.

To be clear – I do not intend to discourage anyone about their human experience but rather to bring into focus the importance of understanding how such things such as justice, mercy and hope are justified more and given traction with a belief that regardless of our mortal experience there is justice, mercy and hope beyond or outside of mortal life. Or as the Apostle Paul said, “if we have hope in this life only we are of all men most miserable.”

[Author]

Posts