Is Greed Good?
This is the topic for the newest Public Square discussion over at Patheos.
Jul
22
Jul
21
Lowered Expectations?
One meme that is constantly bandied about the bloggernacle is the idea that people leave the church because they are too black and white in their thinking. That if people could just see more shades of gray then they wouldn’t be so disappointed in the shadier aspects of Mormon history. In fact, I think this view is very common amongst liberal leaning Mormons. I also think that this idea does more harm than good and ignores the issues and people it is meant to help. It is the liberal equivalent of the conservative Mormon’s “get your mind right by reading the scriptures and praying more.” And it is just as helpful. I see at least three problems with this idea.
Read more »
Jul
15
My Thomas Marsh Experience
Edit: This post is in response to the Thomas Marsh discussion here.
I was recently present for the Thomas Marsh lesson in a ward not my own. Being aware of the larger context, that for Marsh, the milk issue was really the straw that broke the camel’s back, I felt compelled to speak up. The problem is always how to do so constructively, especially in a ward where they don’t know you at all. Here’s what I said. Read more »
Jul
14
The Word
This is a talk I gave many years ago, slightly modified.
I have had a lot of time to think about the scriptures, what they mean and how they mean. I have read the history of the times in which these texts were produced, and learned all sorts of theories about their development. Clearly, I think that these things are not only interesting, but also extremely useful for making the scriptures real, seeing in them both the humanity and divinity, and at the same time obliterating such binary distinctions, which I take to be the essential message of Mormonism.
Read more »
Jul
14
Polls Close Tomorrow!
If you haven’t yet voted in this year’s Niblets, stroll on over to Mormon Matters to check out the many amazing nominations. It is real treat to read or reread so many of the excellent content produced in the bloggernacle in 2008! Of course, FPR and many FPR posts are nominated, but we encourage you to vote your conscience for what you think is the best. Good luck to all!
Jul
9
What Most Influences FPR Bloggers’ Reading of the Bible? Updated
Ken Brown at the blog C. Orthodoxy started a meme asking bloggers involved in biblical studies what are the top 5 books or scholars which have influenced them the most. Here’s FPR’s contribution, organized by author:
Jul
9
Make Me More Interesting
I recently turned 25 and realized that there are a lot of things that I don’t know about that I would like to know more about. One of them is fiction. I rarely, rarely read fiction. Part of the reason is that I feel guilty reading fiction, like I am cheating on my non-fiction partner. I say to myself, “If I am going to be reading, I should be reading non-fiction.” However, like any good 19th c. Mormon knows, there is enough of me to go around. So I am looking for you all to set me up by recommending a few books in each of the following categories:
Read more »
Jul
5
Archaeology, History, and Scripture Part 3: The Historicity Question
In previous posts in this series I have danced around the historicity question. In this post I will tackle this head on. The best advice I can give believers who are beginning to judge what is historical in scripture and what is not is the following (and yes I mean to yell this). YOU ARE TOO BIASED TO BE A GOOD JUDGE OF WHAT IS HISTORICAL AND WHAT IS NOT. You would do much better to focus on finding the best historical context in which to place the events and stories found in the scriptures. When you start to become uncomfortable about some of the answers you find, congratulations, you are now unbiased enough to start answering the historicity question. In fact, by that point, you will implicitly understand how to answer the historicity question and I won’t have to explain it to you.
Read more »
Jul
3
Cosmopolitanism: An Alternative to Patriotism
Author’s note: The following is not particularly Mormon Studies (though Martha Nussbaum does hold an appointment in the Divinity School, as well as the Law School and Philosophy Department, at the University of Chicago). It is rooted in my Kantian/Rawlsian approach to Mormonism (which is my Christianity). I decided to post this after thinking about two posts elsewhere on the bloggernacle about Mormonism and Patriotism (here and here).
Introduction
Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, I have had doubts about the way in which the lens of nationalism informs my view of the world. While many turned to the flag and the chapel in the aftermath of those attacks, both seemed superficial to me. The loss that day was not an American loss but a loss of humanity. Those lives had value not as Americans (of course, many were not Americans), but as human beings. That many rallied around the banner of patriotism disturbed me then as much then as it does today. To identify life with nationality seems to cheapen life.
My disposition towards patriotism and nationalism led me to approach Martha Nussbaum’s argument for cosmopolitanism in For Love of Country: Debating the Limits of Patriotism with a sense of hope. Nussbaum’s argument is not itself a response to September 11 (since it appears five years earlier) but is instead a call for a new outlook in the age of globalization when we no longer can think of ourselves as strictly local actors. As Americans, we seem to often view the world as our background but at the same time limit our view of the world to those things that are within our own national interest. For Americans this is often the case because of our relative strength, wealth, and cultural influence. But this ease by which we view the world from either a nationalistic or realist point of view is troubling from a moral point of view.
In this post, I will look at Nussbaum’s argument for cosmopolitanism as an alternative to patriotism. After placing Nussbaum’s argument within the larger debate about cosmopolitanism, I will look at a number of critiques of her argument.
I will argue for a form of strong moral cosmopolitanism. I argue that this position is more morally justifiable that patriotism. I will also argue for moral cosmopolitanism over political cosmopolitanism. The purpose of this post is to provide an argument for cosmopolitanism in general and strong moral cosmopolitanism in particular.