From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #758 Reply-To: aml-list Sender: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk aml-list-digest Monday, July 1 2002 Volume 01 : Number 758 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 23:11:22 -0700 From: "Richard Johnson" Subject: [AML] Generalizing from Personal Experience [MOD: I hope that the thread title I've given here catches the essence of what Richard has said, and how these particular items all tie together.] I have sat down several times in the past few weeks to write a "humorous" rejoinder to some of the things that have begun to be "givens" on the list. Among them: People who weep while giving testimonies are doing some kind of maudlin manipulation Missions are generally unpleasant exercizes in number generation and satisfying number crazy mission presidents. Using personal experience, if it includes mention of church callings or tasks is an indirect method of competing with others. There have been a number of others, but, for today, I'll limit myself to those above. I just sat in one of the more powerful meetings of my life watching and listening to the Prophet of the Lord break down into tears repeatedly as the emotion of the moment overwhelmed him. Nothing maudlin, and if it was manipulation, I think we could use more. On this subject, as a point of information, I spent the last ten years of my career teaching and studying persuasion. A major point of almost all the scholarship relating to persuasion is that emotion (particularly well grounded honest emotion) is the key. Logical argument may win a debate, or even intellectually convince but emotional appeal is that which spurs action. Talk to a group of smokers and ask how many of them are intellectually convinced that smoking is unwise, unhealthy etc., etc. The percentage will be in the high eighties or nineties. Intellectual argument doesn't affect their behavior at all. Those who quit are those who are frightened, really sense health risks or are otherwise emotionally effected. Abram Maslow, studying persuasive appeals identified a hierarchy of motive appeals that are effective. All of them are emotional, and I suspect that everyone who has ever sincerely converted to the Gospel has done so , in part, because of a contact with the spirit that was ultimately emotional rather than rational. I, for one, am not ashamed of the fact that I frequently am moved to tears as I attempt to speak about those spiritual things that affect me or have effected me (in other words when I bear my testimony, or in fact whenever I talk about the atonement, the suffering of Christ in the garden, or, for that matter of the glory of the resurrection or Christ gathering the children about him on the American continent. These things overwhelm me with an understanding of how dependent I am on the Grace of the Lord. For that matter, I frequently spend tears on the testimonies of others, and certainly I wept through much of this aftenoon's meeting. If you did not, at least a little, frankly I am sorry for you. Missions: Are they filled with humor, probably, though often in retrospect. I remember my first baptism as a missionary. I really had little to do with the conversion of this dear old sister. She was partially deaf (boy can I relate to that NOW.), in her eighties and her daughter was one of the first converts in the little town of Joensuu that we (with little help from a five month missionary in the days when the first word heard in the foreign language was usually after one's arrival in country), but I went out to do this into a freezing lake (all lakes are freezing in Finland- it doesn't matter what the season) where we had to wade about fifty yards to find a place deep enough. I manage to misspeak the baptism prayer (in Finnish) several times then a foot came up, or a hand. One of my most vivid memories from the mission is that poor sister going under the water for the seventh time muttering (in translation) "not again, not again". All that being said, and acknowledging that I spent the first three months muttering at the missionaries who bore their testimonies after they came home, not because they spoke about the "best two years of their lives" but because they made it sound so easy, like the spirit just picked missionaries up and carried them along. I wished they had told the truth about it being one of the hardest jobs anyone will ever have. But I spent thirty three months in the mission field and I can honestly say that twenty four of them were the best two years of my life up to that time. The other nine were the times when I was wandering in ignorance in the lee of a quick speaking companion trying to stay awake when I didn't understand a thing, or times when I was bleeding through member problems as an underage Branch President, or a certain time when I was just trunky. (Imaging if you will the emotional appeal of a District President (think Zone leader with a lot of ecclesiastical responsibilities as well) who had been a greeny, trained by me, sitting in the room teary eyed, appealing to me to try to become the kind of proselyter I "used to be" . I also had a personal interview with Apostle Spencer W. Kimball, that will stick in my memory for a long time. All that said, I wouldn't trade the time I spent in Finland for anything except my marriage, and I am not sure I could have been even a marginal husband without having served the mission. It is pretty obvious how I stand on relating to past experience ecclesiastical or otherwise. I think that to try to express one's deep opinions without putting them into the context from which they flowed is not only foolish, it verges on arrogance if not actual dishonesty. Think of how much of Eric's contributions are of value primarily because of his experience as a Playwright, a teacher of playwriting, and even as the son of an opera singer. Why should someone whose experience that contributes to the discussion is based on an ecclesiastical callling hide that experience. Frankly I think is is nonsense. Well, If there is anyone whom I haven't offended wait till I get back to my home where I can scan my archives rather than working from memory and I'll try to get to you too. The biggest point that I want to make here is that we, as individuals, tend to make things unversal based on our own limited paradigms. Whoops, I used paradigm. I'd better be careful, someone will think I have been reading _The Seven Habits_. (Actually I have, and for many people whom I have taught to use time management, goal setting, and setting priorities they are very useful-- for some, even life changing-- Not for me but I have seen some real changes, for the better, in some of my in and out of school students. Richard B. Johnson (without all the sig. stuff after my name because I am using my son's computer out in Washington State. Has anyone out there ever heard of Washougal?) - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 00:19:01 -0600 From: "Nan McCulloch" Subject: [AML] Nauvoo Temple Dedication Didn't you love it when Pres. Monson quoted Jane Manning James in his = address at the Nauvoo Temple Dedication? Thanks to Margaret and Darius = I feel I know Jane Manning James, but I would wager that a huge = percentage =20 of church members do not. I leaned over to a friend and said, "Jane = Manning James was a faithful black Latter Day Saint sister who lived = with the Prophet Joseph and Emma in Nauvoo. Joseph and Emma wanted to = adopt her and have her sealed to them." Yes, I know that if we were all = more =20 socially advanced, I wouldn't have to state that Jane was black, but it = was germane to this story. I probably will continue to identify a = person as black when it is necessary to promote understanding. When my = children and I visited Nauvoo for the open house, we were moved to see a = picture of my great-grandfather, one of the early twelve apostles, at = the foot of the stairs in the Kimball house. I told them that = grandfather knew Joseph and Hyrum Smith and was there when Joseph's = mantle fell upon Brigham Young. I also told them that he came into the = Salt Lake Valley with the first company of Saints and may have know = Elijah Able, Green Flake and Jane Manning James.=20 Nan McCulloch - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 09:25:25 -0700 From: The Laird Jim Subject: Re: [AML] Satan Figures (was: Conpiracies in Literature) One of my own beliefs about the Old Scratch is somewhat at odds with what is generally considered to be the standard Mormon belief. I don't think that's Satan's plan was to force us all to be righteous. This derives from the fact that I don't believe in the existence of force at all--and I believe freedom or agency is the foundation of the whole universe. From that context the only way to destroy agency is to make human life "outcome-based education." No matter what you do you pass. Every soul of us. That would be appealing, that would be something people would go for. I have a hard time buying the idea that 1/3 of the Host of Heaven would've gone for the lash rather than the troll's lollypop. I had a seminary teacher who demonstrated this idea by giving everybody in our class the choice between high schools--a normal high school where you graduated based on your merits (which is how high schools work at least in theory), a wild & crazy high school where no matter what you did you got straight A's and a Force HS where they watched your every move and forced you to get A's. Strangely enough 2/3 of the class voted to stay in a normal school and 1/3 voted for Wild & Crazy HS. One girl wanted to got to Force HS, and considering what a "Molly Mormon" she was it was astonishing that she didn't understand the gag. At any rate that teacher convinced me, and nothing I've heard or read or seen since has changed my mind. I can see a Son of the Morning feeling compassion for all the lesser souls who wouldn't make it the way he surely would, and there pride is born and pride is the source of all evil. My own "devil" has plenty of shades of the real one, but in large part he's based on an Etruscan myth in terms of his powers, etc. Then I cursed him into an inanimate object and he can only influence through lies, having no power without a wielder, which gives the wielder has power of him, which he cannot long abide. The pride part of the temptations I've got in hand, and as well as the carnal stuff though it's very circumspect. The trouble is my hero won't fall for either. He's got a wife and kids, and his history is one of a long attempt at penance for the first crime he commited and realized it was a crime. The idea that Hannibal Lector is using a debased form of stoicism is intriguing, and I appreciate it greatly. Since stoicism doesn't exist in my world I'll have to work it from another perspective but that's okay. I think I'll borrow from Gnosticism since I detest mysticism in general with very few exceptions. I'm fond of Seneca and Cicero, and I wish more of the Zenos and especially Epictetus survived, but I just enjoy Marcus Aurelius. Perhaps its because of all the history surrounding. First read about him in Gibbon but never realized he was a philosopher exactly until _The Silence of the Lambs_. It is strange how full of holes a public education can be. I wish daily that I had been given the benefit of a classical education. As it is I can only read and dream. The strangest thing you said is one I've heard before and still baffles me. I didn't see any romance between Lector and Starling. He perhaps was headed that way but when I see that movie I don't see her as leaning his way. She was looking at him the same way she was looking at Crawford--vehicle for ambition, mentor to learn from. She wanted into Crawford's task force and Lector was her ticket. I don't mean it in a pejorative way; one doesn't rise without siezing opportunities as they come up. The thing about Lector that is so different from so many villains is his education. It flies in the face of several silly ideas that are so prevalent these days. Largest among these looms the idea that there is no such thing as evil. Fact is, one can choose to be evil, and can even glory in it. My apostle-to-be was brought up within a Gadianton-like cult, though the connection with the secrets was a great secret. He did plenty of evil stuff but the Gods zapped him at just the right moment and he's been repenting ever since. His leaders glory in it, and promote him for his ill deeds, and he hides what he feels long enough to escape. And he loses plenty of battles before he finally is Chosen. He was educated to BE evil, and broke away, so I thought they would work on him through his childhood learning, since that is how most of us determine what is right and wrong in a reflexive way. There are plenty of wrong things I believe because I was taught them long ago. My 10 year attempt at purging such things has met with failure--I actually have to wait for some situations to arise to even remember what I was taught. That's what I was going to do to my hero--hit him with several things at once, and mix the truth and lies of his childhood to confuse and tempt him. The thing about Old Scratch offering Jesus all the kingdoms of the earth wasn't much of a temptation to Jesus. He knew that Satan doesn't own them or control them. He just lies a lot and makes people think he has power. Thanks again, Jim Wilson aka the Laird Jim - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 14:33:43 -0600 From: "Kirk Strickland" Subject: [AML] Re: Generalizing from Personal Experience Veli Johnson, =20 Isn't Washougal where Tanya Harding is from? =20 Enjoyed your post. Not just because I too served in Finland (1973-75), = but because of the point you were making. The reality of an experience = vs. a rose-colored recollection. There's a great short story by Douglas = Thayer in his collection of short stories, Under the Cottonwoods, that = deals directly with the returned missionary sugar-coating syndrome. =20 Veli Kirk Strickland - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 13:57:57 -0600 From: Christopher Bigelow Subject: RE: [AML] Nauvoo Temple Dedication I was quite happy that Pres. Monson did not identify Jane Manning James as "our black sister pioneer" or anything condescending like that. I thought Pres. Hinckley was in rare form. During his harangue on Tom Ford (former governor of Illinois) I was straining a little wondering where he was going with it, and I even started wondering whether a prophet could ever let a little senility start creeping over the pulpit, but then he brought it full circle and even snuck in that great little barb about the Democrats. I like Pres. Hinckley because he's often not predictable. Chris Bigelow - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2002 18:45:03 -0600 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Generalizing from Personal Experience - ---Original Message From: Richard Johnson > > I, for one, am not ashamed of the fact that I frequently am > moved to tears as I attempt to speak about those spiritual > things that affect me or have effected me (in other words > when I bear my testimony, or in fact whenever I talk about > the atonement, the suffering of Christ in the garden, or, for > that matter of the glory of the resurrection or Christ > gathering the children about him on the American continent. > These things overwhelm me with an understanding of how > dependent I am on the Grace of the Lord. For that matter, I > frequently spend tears on the testimonies of others, and > certainly I wept through much of this aftenoon's meeting. If > you did not, at least a little, frankly I am sorry for you. You had me till here. I don't mind if people are weepy in spiritual meetings. We shouldn't judge them as maudlin or manipulative just because they shed tears. But this part at the end is simply going too far. I get weepy at really odd things--pretty much exclusively based on personal, internal maunderings. So I don't cry much and I have yet to shed tears based on external emotional stimulus--including some pretty spiritual meetings. Now, I didn't attend the Nauvoo dedication, so I can't really speak to the specific circumstances, but I'm relatively certain I'd have stood dry eyed to the end. Maybe I *am* lacking some emotional component that is otherwise common to mankind. But if I do, I don't feel the lack (I wouldn't, would I?). So while I'm willing to withhold judgment of the weepier people around me as you request, I ask the same in return. I don't want or need your pity. > The biggest point that I want to make here is that we, as > individuals, tend to make things unversal based on our own > limited paradigms. Right. Judging others is a tricky business and should be undertaken only with fear and trembling--whichever side of the spectrum they occupy. And really, making values universal is a form of judgment. That's why universals are best received from divine sources. Crying (or not crying) in meetings is definitely *not* a universal so we'd probably be best served if we left both poles alone. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 11:04:13 -0500 From: Linda Adams Subject: Re: [AML] Essays on Infertility I'm sorry, I posted the wrong address for the LDS infertility group. I should have double-checked first. To subscribe, post a blank email to: 2ofus4now-subscribe@yahoogroups.com Or go to the website at: >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/2ofus4now/ It appears to be a busy list, averaging 500 posts a month with 236 members. This is the moderator description of the list: "(Two of Us For Now) We are a support and information group for discussing infertility, adoption, and pregnancy loss from an LDS perspective. We understand the unique challenges and blessings of being LDS and unable to carry or conceive a child. We invite people to participate who have personal experience (past or present) with infertility, pregnancy loss, or adoption; those who support a friend or loved one dealing with these issues; or those who have professional experience in these areas. People with or without children are welcome." Linda Adams adamszoo@sprintmail.com http://home.sprintmail.com/~adamszoo - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #758 ******************************