Use of Church authority in rhetorical discussions

[Archaea]

How Church members use Church authority in discussions.

It is interesting how members such as Indy or Tex use the quotations of leaders as if that statement should quelch all further discussion.

In terms of exercising priesthood authority, I agree once they have spoken, the Church will act upon their authority, but that's not the same thing, as investigating what was said, why for purposes of an academic discussion. I gather members confuse the situation, meaning Church authority means one should cease thinking for oneself.

Does anybody else see, agree or disagree with the distinction?

[Requiem]

Originally Posted by Archaea

How Church members use Church authority in discussions.

It is interesting how members such as Indy or Tex use the quotations of leaders as if that statement should quelch all further discussion.

In terms of exercising priesthood authority, I agree once they have spoken, the Church will act upon their authority, but that's not the same thing, as investigating what was said, why for purposes of an academic discussion. I gather members confuse the situation, meaning Church authority means one should cease thinking for oneself.

Does anybody else see, agree or disagree with the distinction?

Admittedly I am new here and, according to Mr. Balboa, have little credibility. However, I emphatically agree with this statement. I also concur with a related comment you made in a recent post:

Every use of authority is one of condescension by you. The reason is you are not looking at the possible applications or alternative interpretations of the authority, believing a superficial rendering of the authority makes your point. Well as many of us are attorneys, engineers or academics, nothing is as it seems. If you wish a better interaction, a cite to authority together with a triumphant, arrogant declaration: "How could the President find the temple ceremony stimulating?".

The modus operandi used by selected - shall we say more "orthodox" members - is to offer a prophetic quote and claim case closed. Like you I prefer to exercise my own brain and not rely on others. In any case this board is a terrific forum.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Amen, Arch. None of us (well, few of us) would argue that authority citations are useless but it all boils down to the manner of usage. All too often they are used as a blunt instrument rather than part of a well-crafted line of reasoning.

[JohnnyLingo]

Amen, Arch. None of us (well, few of us) would argue that authority citations are useless but it all boils down to the manner of usage. All too often they are used as a blunt instrument rather than part of a well-crafted line of reasoning.

Help me understand the difference, homeboy.

Give me an example where you approved the use of an authority citation and felt it was part of a well-crafted line of reasoning.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

Help me understand the difference, homeboy.

Give me an example where you approved the use of an authority citation and felt it was part of a well-crafted line of reasoning.

Look up just about any post by Pelagius, AA, UtahDan, or Sleeping in EQ, for starters.

By the way, are you really interested in learning the difference or are you simply eager to make it appear that I don't like church leaders by the manner in which you asked that question?

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Look up just about any post by Pelagius, AA, UtahDan, or Sleeping in EQ, for starters.

By the way, are you really interested in learning the difference or are you simply eager to make it appear that I don't like church leaders by the manner in which you asked that question?

Copout. Give me an example.

And I am seriously interested in learning how to use citations of authority in a way that you and others won't merely dismiss as invalid.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

Copout. Give me an example.

Copout yourself. I just gave you plenty of examples. You know how the search feature works, don't you?

Don't get lazy on me, Lingo. I am not your mother.

[JohnnyLingo]

So every single post by those you listed contains exactly what you are talking about.

Good to know.

Look, if you don't want to take three seconds to find an example and help me understand what you're talking about, I am forced to assume you're blowing smoke.

Citations of authority have nothing to do with how they are presented and everything with who is presenting them.

If you dislike the poster, the citation is handled poorly. Otherwise, it's brilliantly done.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

So every single post by those you listed contains exactly what you are talking about.

Good to know.

Look, if you don't want to take three seconds to find an example and help me understand what you're talking about, I am forced to assume you're blowing smoke.

Citations of authority have nothing to do with how they are presented and everything with who is presenting them.

If you dislike the poster, the citation is handled poorly. Otherwise, it's brilliantly done.

Absolutely incorrect. If you wish to see how not to use authority, look at Tex or Indy. In their usage, they will cite some partial statement by a Church authority, and then pause to imply anybody who seeks a broader understanding of the context of the statement or who can think of a contrary example is nothing but an apostate.

Pelagius on the other hand, if you read any of his lesson notes, uses authority not to force just one conclusion but to give pause for consideration. Note the example when Pelagius cited the D. Michael Quinn article on women already having the priesthood. Quinn is probably a bad example, but he carefully cited a noted historian, not even claiming he agreed with the paper for us to consider an alternative view.

None of the triad cites for the purposes of instilling debate, but rather the squelch debate under the authority card that since the Triad cited "god's authority" all other authority is apostate. When in fact, there is diverse opinion within the Quorum of Twelve itself.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

So every single post by those you listed contains exactly what you are talking about.

Good to know.

Look, if you don't want to take three seconds to find an example and help me understand what you're talking about, I am forced to assume you're blowing smoke.

Citations of authority have nothing to do with how they are presented and everything with who is presenting them.

If you dislike the poster, the citation is handled poorly. Otherwise, it's brilliantly done.

Absolutely incorrect. If you wish to see how not to use authority, look at Tex or Indy. In their usage, they will cite some partial statement by a Church authority, and then pause to imply anybody who seeks a broader understanding of the context of the statement or who can think of a contrary example is nothing but an apostate.

Pelagius on the other hand, if you read any of his lesson notes, uses authority not to force just one conclusion but to give pause for consideration. Note the example when Pelagius cited the D. Michael Quinn article on women already having the priesthood. Quinn is probably a bad example, but he carefully cited a noted historian, not even claiming he agreed with the paper for us to consider an alternative view.

None of the triad cites for the purposes of instilling debate, but rather the squelch debate under the authority card that since the Triad cited "god's authority" all other authority is apostate. When in fact, there is diverse opinion within the Quorum of Twelve itself.