Fire and Brimstone Mormons are getting more and more out of touch

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

nobody takes Tex seriously. His credibility can't be destroyed because he has none. chill out.

Will do.

[Sassy in RS]

If you go easy, sleepy, everything will be better. We know you teach eight days a week and tex just isn't teachable. You should ignore him.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

BYU students should be self-righteous prudish nutjobs? Everyone I have talked with thinks they are an embarrassment.



So you are faulting BYU as an institution because there are some in our LDS culture that have unreasonable stereotypes of the "ideal" BYU student? That hardly seems fair.



Yes, that is unfortunate.

I don't know if I am faulting the institution. I think I have argued in the past that the perception is not reality, at least it wasn't when I went to school there. Nor does it represent the relatives I have currently attending BYU.

The only thing I would have a disagreement with the "institution" is the need it appears to protect the image. I would say let the chips fall where they may. It is a great institution, but far from perfect.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by BYU71

I don't know if I am faulting the institution. I think I have argued in the past that the perception is not reality, at least it wasn't when I went to school there. Nor does it represent the relatives I have currently attending BYU.

The only thing I would have a disagreement with the "institution" is the need it appears to protect the image. I would say let the chips fall where they may. It is a great institution, but far from perfect.

You took the words right out of my mouth. Seems like the need to be image conscious sometimes overwhelms everything else.

[BigFatMeanie]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

I grounded my surmising in the "feeling" of a particular circumstance. Discrimination is not just a feeling. It involves laws, behaviors, media representations, and a whole host of other phenomena. Your suggestion that a complex construct like discrimination is analogus to a feeling in a particular circumstance is both ridiculous and nauseating.

I'm curious about the philosophy that underlies your words here (maybe this would be better in a different thread but I'm too lazy to start one). Are you asserting that discrimination necessarily involves laws, behaviors, media, etc.? In other words, one can't consider one's self discriminated against on the basis of feelings alone?

If you truly believe that discrimination can't exist on the basis of feelings alone then I'm somewhat surprised because I had (perhaps incorrectly) considered you an academic and I think it's safe to say that academic institutions these days are among the biggest proponents of the idea that mere feelings (typically "hurt feelings") can be the basis of discrimination claims. Thus the proliferation of speech codes, sensitivity trainings, etc. If you're so inclined, I would love for you to expound upon the ideas that underlie your words above.

P.S. I should note that the use of the word "discrimination" in this sense implies improper or unjust discrimination but it's too tedious to explicitly spell it out every time I type the word. Obviously any time one makes a choice one discriminates, or recognizes the difference and discrimination isn't of itself inherently bad. I'm not a fan of words such as "discriminate", "diversity", and "black" taking on new connotations. It makes our language less rich and less expressive. When words take on new connotations, one can never know whether a word really means what it denotes or whether it is really a "codeword" for some other concept.

[ute4ever]

The most important address given in General Conference is the statistical report. Everything else is just a guideline, but whether or not you give heed to the counsel will not keep you out of the waters of baptism, or out of the temple, etc. Come one, come all, do what you want, it's good to have you aboard, be sure to tell all of your friends.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by BigFatMeanie

I'm curious about the philosophy that underlies your words here (maybe this would be better in a different thread but I'm too lazy to start one). Are you asserting that discrimination necessarily involves laws, behaviors, media, etc.? In other words, one can't consider one's self discriminated against on the basis of feelings alone?

If you truly believe that discrimination can't exist on the basis of feelings alone then I'm somewhat surprised because I had (perhaps incorrectly) considered you an academic and I think it's safe to say that academic institutions these days are among the biggest proponents of the idea that mere feelings (typically "hurt feelings") can be the basis of discrimination claims. Thus the proliferation of speech codes, sensitivity trainings, etc. If you're so inclined, I would love for you to expound upon the ideas that underlie your words above.

P.S. I should note that the use of the word "discrimination" in this sense implies improper or unjust discrimination but it's too tedious to explicitly spell it out every time I type the word. Obviously any time one makes a choice one discriminates, or recognizes the difference and discrimination isn't of itself inherently bad. I'm not a fan of words such as "discriminate", "diversity", and "black" taking on new connotations. It makes our language less rich and less expressive. When words take on new connotations, one can never know whether a word really means what it denotes or whether it is really a "codeword" for some other concept.

BFM, you are wrong on all fronts. Sometime I'll do a post on constructs, denotation, and connotation, but you are just out of your element here.

I appreciate that you don't want to pass up a cheap shot at the academy, but give it a rest.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

BFM, you are wrong on all fronts. Sometime I'll do a post on constructs, denotation, and connotation, but you are just out of your element here.

I appreciate that you don't want to pass up a cheap shot at the academy, but give it a rest.

Ah, SiEQ is back in force.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

Ah, SiEQ is back in force.

Truth be told, I am often first in line to take shots at the Ivory Tower...

[BigFatMeanie]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

BFM, you are wrong on all fronts.

Just because you say so?