Here are two beliefs that are widely held by Latter-day Saints (and I’m guessing more than a few Christians):
1. We can make decisions by praying and getting ‘impressions’ or ‘revelations’ about what to do.
2. Satan tries to trick us into thinking that good is evil, and evil good.
So when you get a personal revelation that something’s good, it could be actually good (in which case you should do it), or it could be Satan telling you it’s good (and you shouldn’t). How can you tell the difference? What if Satan is pulling the ol’ reverse psychology and making you think it’s bad so you won’t do it, but it’s actually good? Or perhaps a triple reverse whammy? How about when something’s difficult or you hit a snag in your plan? Are you facing opposition from Satan and you should keep going, or is it the Lord giving you a signal that you should stop?
It’s a tough question, so I’ll make it multiple choice.
a) I know because of the feelings of the Spirit.
And of course, your feelings can never be wrong. Feelings of the Spirit confer infallibility upon the feeler. Try again.
b) I know because it’s in line with the scriptures.
Your interpretation of the scriptures, a contradictory hodgepodge of fables. You can find anything and its opposite there. Next!
c) If you don’t know the difference, you must have sinned, and are in the grip of the Evil One. Try getting an exorcism.
Tried it. Still possessed, but I’m learning to live with it. Got anything else?
d) It’s silly to do things based on the supposed desires of a hypothetical being.
Hmm. Answer d’s looking good.
The problem here is the opacity of the metaphysical. If I have two physical explanations for something, it’s possible to determine which is right experimentally. But if there are two metaphysical explanations for something (is it Jehovah or Zeus?), then there’s no way to determine which explanation is better. Not that this stops people from trying. They examine feelings, events, and unusual happenings in order to scry the divine will. But it’s superstition and it doesn’t work.
25 May 2008 at 8:09 pm
Isn’t metaphysics just a way of asking yourself how the facts you see around you COULD be interpreted for your personal life. In other words I use science to find out how my DNA effects my behaviour but I use metaphysics to decide how that knowledge should be interpreted into my own life.
Or maybe better put metaphysics IS the proccess by which we decide how to live with what we know.
30 May 2008 at 9:01 pm
Actually – the idea is that one should carefully research things out and make a thoughtful and what you believe correct decision based on the facts you know. If you then discuss it with God and afterwards your decision becomes less sensible, then perhaps you need to rethink it and arrive at a different conclusion.
Rarely, have I seen Mormons do this. Instead they just skip to the ask God part. I call this stupid thought vs stupor of thought.
31 May 2008 at 2:14 am
Jeffrey: As I understand it, ‘metaphysics’ has a more specific meaning involving the existence of non-physical things. But I see what you mean: reason gives us knowledge, and we then use emotions etc. to make choices we can live with. Kinda?
Tobin: Yes, the pattern is supposed to be ‘work it out yourself, and then take it to the Lord in prayer’.
That sounds nice, but it’s indistinguishable from ‘actually sitting down and thinking about what to do’. You’ve already done all the work, so what do supernatural beings have to do with it? It’s as if you’re just sorting it out yourself, and then claiming that’s what Jesus wants you to do. And this is from someone who’s tried to use this model many times.
But the point of the post: if, after sorting it out in your own mind, you pray and get a different feeling, you still don’t know who’s putting that thought there. God? Satan? You, yourself? Superman? Ed McMahon, with a mind control ray?
4 June 2008 at 5:06 pm
Well, not exactly. Current wackos use it that way. This from the wikiP:
The word derives from the Greek words μετά (metá) (meaning “after”) and φυσικά (physiká) (meaning “physical”), “physical” referring to those works on matter by Aristotle in antiquity. The prefix meta- (“after”) was attached to the chapters in Aristotle’s work that physically followed after the chapters on “physics”, in posthumously edited collections. Aristotle called some of the subjects treated there “first philosophy”
A central branch of metaphysics is ontology, the investigation into what types of things there are in the world and what relations these things bear to one another. The metaphysician also attempts to clarify the notions by which people understand the world, including existence, objecthood, property, space, time, causality, and possibility.
More recently, the term “metaphysics” has also been employed by non-philosophers to refer to “subjects that are beyond the physical world”. A “metaphysical bookstore”, for instance, is not one that sells books on ontology, but rather one that sells esoteric books on spirits, faith healing, crystal power, occultism, and other such topics which the philosophic pursuit of metaphysics generally does not include.
Before the development of modern science, scientific questions were addressed as a part of metaphysics known as “natural philosophy”; the term “science” itself meant “knowledge”. The Scientific Revolution, however, made natural philosophy an empirical and experimental activity unlike the rest of philosophy, and by the end of the eighteenth century it had begun to be called “science” in order to distinguish it from philosophy. Thereafter, metaphysics became the philosophical enquiry of a non-empirical character into the nature of existence.
Also, as to the original point of the post, If I were to only respond to that all I would have to say is “yep, I agree”, not really much of a conversation.
But if you see things like gods as mearly metaphores for the inner dialog we all have between the self and the other (how we see ourselves in this existance and what meanings we create for ourselves and this existance) then we can have some, I think, interesting discusions. I’m sure you don’t just want people to read your posts and comment, “yeppers.”
5 June 2008 at 11:56 pm
Daniel: Actually, that is where we choose different roads. Your approach is fine and exactly what I do initially. Namely, work it out on my own. However, you are debilitated by refraining to ask God. From my perspective, it is simply a better approach since God is more intelligent than us. You can see how I would view the fact you don’t do this has a serious handicap? It also answers your question as to how do I know that I’m being inspired – that is simple, the truth is simple, clear, precise, revealing, insightful, etc (ie TRUE). When you learn something true it broadens your views, not limits them.
6 June 2008 at 12:32 am
@ Tobin:
If your assumptions were correct (viz. that supernatural beings exist), you’d have it exactly right.
I do not think your assumptions are correct. Furthermore, you do not know that your assumptions are correct, and you are unable to demonstrate this in any meaningful way.
What is debilitating is taking advice from beings that do not exist and mistaking the imaginations of your heart for actual divine truth.
I never get tired of this conversation.
6 June 2008 at 9:32 pm
Daniel: I’m comfortable with that. I know you don’t believe it anymore. That’s fine. I’m convinced otherwise when I reflect on my experiences. Personally, I’d encourage you to live a good life and seek to follow the truth and it shouldn’t be a problem in the next life. I really don’t have a problem with that because this is something we can discuss later after your and I transition to the next life (though you might want to modify your position at that point). 🙂
9 June 2008 at 4:39 pm
Okay, that is annoying.
You’re making huge claims, backing them up with no evidence besides what’s going on in your head, and then you expect people to believe you?
What’s up with that?
12 June 2008 at 10:45 pm
Daniel: I’m quite sure you find all of this very annoying. However, I’m sticking to my guns. There is a God and you can interact with that God now or later, but that’s between you and God – not me. It’s just that simple. You can make an effort anytime you want. However, we can discuss this for years, but the fact is you will be baptized, you will have your work done, you will see God face-to-face and so on. All of this will happen and it doesn’t matter what you think or believe Daniel. For me, it is a foregone conclusion and is inevitable (and quite annoying to you I’m sure). In the end, time is on my side, eventually you will concede that you are mistaken. Whether that happens now or later doesn’t matter.
Personally, I’d rather we held off and did work for the dead till after the Millenium starts – but that’s just me. People right now don’t have enough knowledge or perspective and it just isn’t the right time for most of this and causes problems. Ah well.
13 June 2008 at 1:40 am
Tobin, my man, I would love to believe you, I really would. But you’re not giving me a good reason to do so. Come up with some empirical evidence for your claims, and then we can talk. That’s the way it works around here.