Sunday, July 31, 2011

Mormon Inquiry: Truth (Continued) and Compassion

Not all of my posts have an agenda.  This post does.  I want you to sign the Charter for Compassion.

Truth is a word loaded with potential attributions.  Separate yourself for a moment from how you attribute the word, "T/t/ruth".  I am not referring to how we recognize religious truth, but how religious individuals attribute the word.  I see three common attributions to the word “truth” that occur within religion (this is not a comprehensive list).
1. Truth is attributed to actual experience (literal, how an individual experiences life and how life “really” happens)
2. Truth is attributed to how life should be (not necessarily how life actually is, but an idealistic view of how life should be)
3. Truth is attributed to how life will be (not necessarily how life currently is, but how life will be in the future)

First strain of thought:
Using the 2nd and 3rd, the “should be” and “will be” of religious truths, we can measure the 1st attribution of religious truth.  The religious truth equation for this example: is a religion “actually” (1st) producing the “should be” (2nd) and “will be”’s (3rd) of religious truth?

Second strain of thought:
When multiple different religions produce the same principle(s), the same principle(s) should have a higher probability of actualizing (being real or actually occurring) within and outside of their own religious context.

Considering both the first and second strains of thought, what is the most common similar principle between different religions and are religions actualizing that principle?

Recognizing other’s as one’s self, or the Golden Rule, is found in every major religion.

http://www.teachingvalues.com/goldenrule.html

http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Rule

But do religions practice it when they encounter other worldviews, or differing groups of people?  If religions preach compassion, but do not practice it outside of their religious context, are they acting within their proclaimed truth?

Why is it the most common principle found in different religions is not always the most common response to religious difference?

Even though the principle of the golden rule is found in every major religion, religions have a tendency to not practice it when they encounter a different religious group or different groups of people.

Sometimes religions should repent :)

Compassion is a principle worth actualizing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wktlwCPDd94&feature=player_embedded
   and
http://www.charterforcompassion.org/

(first strain of thought)Compassion “should be”(2nd) and “will be”(3rd) the most “actual”(1st) religious principle because it is the most common repeating principle amongst differing religions (second strain of thought).

Compassion should be a Truth. Sign the Charter :)

Sunday, July 24, 2011

Mormon Inquiry’s Method


The same feelings of divine-awe some Mormons have when they receive answers to their religious questions I receive when religious answers are questioned.  This is the method by which Mormon Inquiry operates.

Mormon Inquiry’s Method:

Purpose- I believe the best answers first come from the best questions.  Mormon Inquiry attempts to develop the best questions.

I.      Subject of post will be presented, most likely with considerations and possibilities
II.    After reading the post, the reader will have the opportunity to attempt to answer the question or further develop the question
a.     If the reader chooses to answer the question, consider the following
                                               i.     After the reader provides their answer, the reader should ask this question to themselves and provide a response
1.     Is it possible the opposite (or some other variation) of my response may also be correct?
a.     If there is an opposite or variation to your response, does this strengthen/weaken your argument or answer?
b.      If there is no opposite or variation to your response that can be identified, does the absence of an opposite strengthen/weaken your argument or answer?
2.     Or, how is my answer the best possibility?
a.     What observable evidence supports my answer?
b.     Or, what probabilities/feasibilities/plausibilities support my answer?
b.     If the reader chooses to further develop the question, consider the following
                                               i.     After the reader provides their question, the reader should ask this question to themselves and provide a response
1.     How does my question further develop the original or subsequent question?
a.     Why?
b.     Why Not?
2.     Or, how does my question provide better possibilities?
a.     Why?
b.     Why Not?

Remember, the best logic not only makes sense within itself (circular) but outside of itself (linear).

Let us test the method with a subject with possibilities for your consideration.

Is the best religious T/t/ruth observable or believed?

The divine is not always so easy to pinpoint, nor is the logic used to describe the divine consistent, nor is the divine’s logic consistent.  Questioning of doctrinal truth is legitimized because doctrinal truth in many ways is relative or contextual and cannot be seen, just believed. 

The only truth that is measurable, outside of personal religious experiences and personal measurements, is the observable results and reactions of the religious individual and community.  Or in other words, the only measurable truth is the observable actions of the religion’s practitioners.  What do people do as a result of their belief?  This question is observable.

Is the best (religious) T/t/ruth observable or believed?