Will Wilkinson - Latest Comments in Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Maple Syrup — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 23:15:03 -0000

...idiot mystic

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Ralph LeGhetto — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 23:14:13 -0000

NO! the real reason mormons are happier is because our religion is true and objectivists know in their hearts that they will only ascend to the first tier of heaven

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Maple Syrup — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 23:11:17 -0000

Bfwh the real reason Mormons are happier is due to the fact that the vast majority of them are crazy

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Francois Tremblay — Fri, 30 May 2008 01:20:00 -0000

This entry was pure nonsense.

Which would you rather be: someone who lives in prison for 100 years, or someone who lives free for 50 years?

Longevity has not nearly as much to do with "flourishing" as you make it to be.

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

The work and the glory — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 16:05:22 -0000

Is the Book of Mormon what it claims to be? The LDS faith rests on two things; the first, is that the Book of Mormon is a true testament to Jesus’ visit to the Americas, and the second is that Joseph Smith was a prophet. Here we’ ll deal with the first question. See the PDF and decide.

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Brian Whetten — Tue, 22 Aug 2006 12:39:28 -0000

I was raised Mormon, left "The Church" when I was 18 and could no longer accept their beliefs, and spent most of my 20's as a pain-filled, often miserable agnostic/Objectivist/over-acheiver. As such, this is actually a profound question I've spent much of my life coming to peace with. It is not my place to tell anyone how they "should" live their life, but I will share a couple things I've learned.

- The Mormons, while often dealing with psychological repression to different degrees, are as a whole, one of the happiest, most loving, most fulfilled, longest living groups on the planet. Their path works for them (until it doesn't).

- As an executive coach, I've learned that the #1 factor that creates growth and change is a person's level of commitment. The Mormons, on the whole, have an extremely high level of commitment to loving and to personal growth - their organization demands it from them - and this is perhaps the single biggest strength of their church. Whether their beliefs are right or wrong, effective or ineffective, they COMMIT to them, both individually and collectively, and do all that they can to "walk their talk."

- This greatest strength is also the organization's greatest weakness (as is typically the case). When the members get to the place where they want to hold on to their commitment to love, but have outgrown some or all of the particular beliefs of their container (as we will all do, multiple times in our lives, if we keep growing) they often get caught in an extremely painful bind, as I did. When I left the church at 18, it was because I could no longer tolerate the civil war in my core - I could no longer deny my personal truths in order to be part of the loving collective. This was a *remarkably* painful choice, which is why there are so few of us "ex-mormons" who have done the healing work necessary to become "post-mormons."

- When this happens, and someone breaks away, it creates a tremendous learning opportunity both for the "leavee" as well as for their family. Sometimes the family fails to rise to the occasion (as happened with my grandfather and uncle) and sometimes they do (as happened with my father and I). When they do, it is typically because they learn and practice a truly profound truth - that love is greater than beliefs.

- If we would like to find more of the love and happiness the Mormons have, and don't feel called to their path, we can still learn from them. Namely, we can strive to find and immerse ourselves in growth processes that are "bigger than ourselves," we can strive to create the same over-arching level of commitment to loving no matter what it takes, and when faced each day with the "master choice" of "do you want to be right or loving?" we can strive to choose loving.

Thank you for opening such a provocative thread (at least for me!) I'm at a family reunion with my Mormon tribe right now, and this sparked my own process of working to see how I can choose my love for them over my remaining anger, hurt, and self-righteous judgments about their path and what it forced me to go through as I left it.

Namaste,
Brian

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Otto Kerner — Sun, 20 Aug 2006 03:49:31 -0000

Isn't the relevant issue the effect that holding each belief system has on the individual, i.e., the difference that it makes to them? If so, then selection bias is a serious problem. Are the angsty teens more or less happy than they would be if they hadn't become O'ists? Are the naturally happy mormons more or less happy than they would be as something else?

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Brian Moore — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 13:13:21 -0000

"It’s probably easier to live up to the tenets of Mormonism than to those of Objectivism."

That's an interesting point. Are people happier when they achieve their value system's goals, or when they continue to strive towards them? (insert tired platitude about "the journey" vs the "destination" here)

For the record, I consider myself a happy objectivist. :)

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Jim Allison — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:37:51 -0000

Verse 2, which precedes the rest, makes it clear that the following statements are not constraints or commandments. In other words, it is intended to be good advice and nothing more.

The Church picks and chooses which parts to constrain members by (alcohol and tobacco), against God's intentions, and which parts to accept as mere advice (eating meat sparingly).

For kicks, go ask your local Mormons if its a commandment from God not to drink alcohol. Then point them out to that verse. You'll get a really whacky answer:

"Afterwards, the Church decided to have a vote and they voted to make parts of the Word of Wisdom commandment"

Talk about ballsy! Since when can mere mortals have a vote to decide devine law?

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Steve — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 01:26:33 -0000

Great post, Will. My interpretation: being happy first requires the 'achievement of ones values', and second that those values be objective (By 'objective' I mean that you truly know what it is that makes you happy). But since mormons score so high on the 'achievement' scale, it matters little that they score low on the objective scale (ie, they don't drink even though it may make them happy).

Objectivists are more critical beings, of course, including of themselves. I know from experience that critical self-analysis has left me with a feeble value system. I am constantly questioning my beliefs.

Thus, objectivists may score low on the achievement scale. What good are your values if you don't trust them?

I'm not sure you could have chosen two more disparate groups on the happiness spectrum.

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

PG — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 20:44:09 -0000

It's probably easier to live up to the tenets of Mormonism than to those of Objectivism. Like most religions, Mormonism seems to be lived up to primarily by avoiding bad, not necessarily by doing a great deal of good. Objectivism demands a great deal of positive action. Teenage angst directs people to Objectivism when they think they're better than those around them; it leaves them unhappy when they realize they're not all John Galts. (It makes the rest of us unhappy when they believe they ARE John Galt.)

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Will Wilkinson — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:17:17 -0000

I had this in mind:

5 That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him.

6 And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.

7 And, again, strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies.

8 And again, tobacco is not for the body, neither for the belly, and is not good for man, but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle, to be used with judgment and skill.

How is that not doctine?

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Jim Allison — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:08:10 -0000

The ban on alcohol and tobacco is a policy of the largest Mormon church (LDS), but it is not doctrine.

http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/89

Of note is verse 2:
"2 To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the aword of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days"

I've been baffled at Mormons who say its a commandment to not drink alcohol, but they're own scriptures states the complete opposite.

Or course, verse 12 is usually ignored:
"12 Yea, flesh also of bbeasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly;"

How many Mormons eat meat multiple times per day?

Weird huh?

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Cliff — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:26:44 -0000

Asking for myself, as an unhappy objectivist: what do you think it is that makes objectivists less happy than Mormons?

What should we do about it? (excluding conversion to Mormonism)

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

John P. — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:24:54 -0000

Beautifully put. I've been having the same thoughts for months. I've known far too many unhappy Objectivists - and too many happy "mystics" - to suppose that living an Objectivish life is the only reliable way to happiness.

Also note: for a philosophy derived from "objective reality," Rand has some awfully Judaic notions of, for instance, the differences between animals and humans.

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Will Wilkinson — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:10:10 -0000

Matt, Right. The ban on alcohol and tobacco is doctrine.

Chad, No minimum. I don't actually plan to survey Objectivists. I would count people who call themselves Objectivists Objectivists. I would, however, be careful to break them up into sub-groups by ID-ing how much of Rand they disagree with, who they consider the best living authorities on Objectivism to be, etc. All of them will score lower than Mormons.

I don't think it's irrelevant if a disproportionate number of O'ists are angsty teens. One of my suspicions is that the O'ist are less happy than Mormons because of negative self-selection. Angsty people, socially isolated people are more likely to become O'ists than sanguine extroverts. Anyway, it's just a thought experiment unless somebody comes up with the money to do a proper survey of Objectivists, which would truly be a weird way to spend money.

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Chad Van Schoelandt — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 11:44:50 -0000

What is the minimum bet, and how do you plan to survey the objectivists? Who counts as objectivist for the survey anyways, because I worry about sample bias. For example, there are bound to be many people who consider themselves Objectivist but to not make hodge to the Rand Institute or publish any writing. Unlike Mormons, I don't know of Objectivists showing up in major studies too often.

Oh, and for happiness, what of the disproportionately high number of Objectivists who are angsty teens? These should only be compared to angsty mormon teens.

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Matt McIntosh — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 01:49:14 -0000

Why would one want to control for alcohol and tobacco consumption, given that these are relevant to Mormonism?

Re: Should Objectivists Become Mormons?

Laural — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:20:28 -0000

Personally I was pretty depressed as a Mormon. And I think if you control for alcohol/tobacco consumption, as well as race, they don't really live longer than anyone else. I mean, I doubt they live as long in Brazil compared to Utah.