Comments on: A FAIR Perspective on Critical Claims http://www.whatdomormonsbelieve.com/2009/08/a-fair-perspective-on-critical-claims/ "We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men." -Joseph Smith Mon, 06 Sep 2010 05:34:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Thaddeus http://www.whatdomormonsbelieve.com/2009/08/a-fair-perspective-on-critical-claims/comment-page-1/#comment-658 Thaddeus Wed, 02 Sep 2009 22:14:53 +0000 http://www.whatdomormonsbelieve.com/?p=1792#comment-658 Katie, I appreciate you brought that up. There are a variety of other 'takes' you can have on Joseph; however, I implicated only the two categories for a few reasons: 1) This is the common dichotomy taken up by the most vocal detractors and defenders. 2) There are people who hypothesize that Joseph Smith never existed; others claim that instead of following a divine voice it was diabolical. These, along with the insane, deluded, or lost-in-fantasy hypotheses tend to ignore mountains of evidence (his writings, travels, relationships, etc.). I happen to believe the fraud hypothesis ignores evidence, too, but arguably less so. His claims were so bold and concrete that it would be incredible for him not to cognitively know their truth values (he <i>wanted</i> to believe he was hefting golden plates that weren't there?). For Joseph to have deceived himself (and others!) so convincingly that even he believed it stretches my imagination further than believing in angels. Feel free to take whatever hypothesis you like, just don't rest your case until you see whether the evidence bears it out. (Bad science is done when a hypothesis is confused with a conclusion). And lest I cross my own words, the surest way to know the truth about this is through revelation from Father. Even an atheist has revelations, she might just call them epiphanies or moments of clarity. Consider their origins carefully. Katie, I appreciate you brought that up. There are a variety of other ‘takes’ you can have on Joseph; however, I implicated only the two categories for a few reasons:

1) This is the common dichotomy taken up by the most vocal detractors and defenders.
2) There are people who hypothesize that Joseph Smith never existed; others claim that instead of following a divine voice it was diabolical. These, along with the insane, deluded, or lost-in-fantasy hypotheses tend to ignore mountains of evidence (his writings, travels, relationships, etc.).

I happen to believe the fraud hypothesis ignores evidence, too, but arguably less so.

His claims were so bold and concrete that it would be incredible for him not to cognitively know their truth values (he wanted to believe he was hefting golden plates that weren’t there?). For Joseph to have deceived himself (and others!) so convincingly that even he believed it stretches my imagination further than believing in angels.

Feel free to take whatever hypothesis you like, just don’t rest your case until you see whether the evidence bears it out. (Bad science is done when a hypothesis is confused with a conclusion).

And lest I cross my own words, the surest way to know the truth about this is through revelation from Father. Even an atheist has revelations, she might just call them epiphanies or moments of clarity. Consider their origins carefully.

]]> By: Katie http://www.whatdomormonsbelieve.com/2009/08/a-fair-perspective-on-critical-claims/comment-page-1/#comment-657 Katie Wed, 02 Sep 2009 21:43:15 +0000 http://www.whatdomormonsbelieve.com/?p=1792#comment-657 Nice post and good links. I like any website with a wiki! I have one question: do you think all non-Mormons think Joseph Smith was a fraud and a hoaxer? I'm inclined to think there are people who think he was not outright fraudulent, but instead delusional. In other words, they think Joseph Smith truly did believe he was a prophet and was visited by angels, and so forth, but that that none of it actually happened. Some people might think this would make him insane, but others might think he was sane but just very much WANTED to believe these things. Is that worth distinguishing, in your opinion? Or is it just a detail in context of the larger picture, which is that people either believe Joseph Smith was a prophet or that he wasn't? As for myself, I don't know. I'm not a Mormon, so obviously I don't believe Joseph was a prophet. Beyond that, I'm not sure. For one, I cannot prove he's not a prophet (just as I can't prove there's no god, etc.). But I haven't come to any conclusion beyond that. I'm hoping Bushman's biography will be enlightening on that front. (I plan to start it as soon as I finish "Infinite Jest," so here's hoping I can get through the NEXT 500 pages of that book in a reasonable amount of time.) Nice post and good links. I like any website with a wiki! I have one question: do you think all non-Mormons think Joseph Smith was a fraud and a hoaxer? I’m inclined to think there are people who think he was not outright fraudulent, but instead delusional. In other words, they think Joseph Smith truly did believe he was a prophet and was visited by angels, and so forth, but that that none of it actually happened. Some people might think this would make him insane, but others might think he was sane but just very much WANTED to believe these things.

Is that worth distinguishing, in your opinion? Or is it just a detail in context of the larger picture, which is that people either believe Joseph Smith was a prophet or that he wasn’t?

As for myself, I don’t know. I’m not a Mormon, so obviously I don’t believe Joseph was a prophet. Beyond that, I’m not sure. For one, I cannot prove he’s not a prophet (just as I can’t prove there’s no god, etc.). But I haven’t come to any conclusion beyond that. I’m hoping Bushman’s biography will be enlightening on that front. (I plan to start it as soon as I finish “Infinite Jest,” so here’s hoping I can get through the NEXT 500 pages of that book in a reasonable amount of time.)

]]>