Why so much discussion about porn?
posted by Joseph at
10/04/2009 12:38:00 PM
Some more thoughts about conference:
WHY is the porn thing such a big issue? I get why porn is a problem and how it can damage individuals and families. What I don't get is church authorities obsession with talking about it, admonishing men over it, basically beating it to death in every conference for the past several years.
Not really sure I have an answer to the question, but I guess I am coming to a few half baked ideas. My personal take on this (which may or may not be worth the hard drive space it's saved on) is that the obsession with porn is the result of some deeply embedded contradictory assumptions held within Mormon belief and culture about the nature of masculinity. In D&C 121 Joseph eloquently articulates the conflict perspective on human nature, and specifically male nature:
So you have this totally brilliant observation about what happens to people when they get power.
And then what do you do? Well, If you're Joseph Smith you go and set the foundations of the Kingdom of God on the earth upon a system of government wherein male individuals are given unchecked power and authority over the community. See the paradox there?
Richard Bushman discusses this problem at length in Rough Stone Rolling, and basically makes the argument that while Joseph recognized this about human nature, he truly believed in the power of the priesthood to make men good and enable them to lead in righteousness. But that argument just pushes the question back a few steps and leads to inquire as to the nature of priesthood authority.
That's a question I'm not going to dive into here. But what I believe this cultural contradiction about the nature of masculinity/priesthood translates into for modern leaders of the LDS church is a kind of frenetic schizophrenia about what it means to be a man, and what divine masculinity is all about (of course, cultural contradiction about the nature of masculinity is not something unique to Mormonism). The connection between this conclusion and the porn thing is still something I'm thinking about. I don't have my mind around it yet, but it's there in the ether somewhere. Somehow the level of porn consumption by men within the church, coupled with the complete impotence that church leaders have in curtailing it, exposes this contradiction in a frightening way. Hence the obsession and never-ending guilt trips in conference about porn consumption.
WHY is the porn thing such a big issue? I get why porn is a problem and how it can damage individuals and families. What I don't get is church authorities obsession with talking about it, admonishing men over it, basically beating it to death in every conference for the past several years.
Not really sure I have an answer to the question, but I guess I am coming to a few half baked ideas. My personal take on this (which may or may not be worth the hard drive space it's saved on) is that the obsession with porn is the result of some deeply embedded contradictory assumptions held within Mormon belief and culture about the nature of masculinity. In D&C 121 Joseph eloquently articulates the conflict perspective on human nature, and specifically male nature:
Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen? Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson—That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness. That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man. Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.
We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion. Hence many are called, but few are chosen.
Doctrine & Covenants 121: 34-40 (emphasis mine)
So you have this totally brilliant observation about what happens to people when they get power.
And then what do you do? Well, If you're Joseph Smith you go and set the foundations of the Kingdom of God on the earth upon a system of government wherein male individuals are given unchecked power and authority over the community. See the paradox there?
Richard Bushman discusses this problem at length in Rough Stone Rolling, and basically makes the argument that while Joseph recognized this about human nature, he truly believed in the power of the priesthood to make men good and enable them to lead in righteousness. But that argument just pushes the question back a few steps and leads to inquire as to the nature of priesthood authority.
That's a question I'm not going to dive into here. But what I believe this cultural contradiction about the nature of masculinity/priesthood translates into for modern leaders of the LDS church is a kind of frenetic schizophrenia about what it means to be a man, and what divine masculinity is all about (of course, cultural contradiction about the nature of masculinity is not something unique to Mormonism). The connection between this conclusion and the porn thing is still something I'm thinking about. I don't have my mind around it yet, but it's there in the ether somewhere. Somehow the level of porn consumption by men within the church, coupled with the complete impotence that church leaders have in curtailing it, exposes this contradiction in a frightening way. Hence the obsession and never-ending guilt trips in conference about porn consumption.
Deconstructing Revelation
posted by Joseph at
10/04/2009 12:24:00 PM
Yesterday during conference, Elder Scott provided a phenomenological breakdown of revelation that was refreshing. He spoke of feeling a flash of inspiration, trying to convert his inspiration into words, reflecting on those words and then revising them until the Holy Spirit confirms their truth. I enjoyed the talk and almost completely agree with that perspective. President Hinckley said similar things and I think there's support for this perspective in Joseph Smith's teachings as well.
I wonder, however, if E. Scott realizes what a double edged sword this view can potentially be, deconstructing the experience of receiving a revelation like that. It's so subjective and informed of deeply held values and desires that may or may not congrue with the world around you. It's like he bails himself out of the oncoming existential crisis at the end by committing to this idea the Holy Ghost will at the end of the day confirm that what you've come to in this subjective experience is "Truth." But that just begs the question about the experience with the HG confirmation and what that really tells you -- what knowledge it really gives you. Deconstruct the experience of confirmation by the HG at the end of the revelation experience and you will find that it is just as subjective as the revelation experience itself. You can't escape the subjectivity of the experience. There is no epistemic access to some objective realm that stands independent of what we subjectively experience.
Again quoting Bourdieu: "Religion can produce the objectivity that it produces only by producing the misrecognition of the limits of the knowledge that it makes possible."
I wonder, however, if E. Scott realizes what a double edged sword this view can potentially be, deconstructing the experience of receiving a revelation like that. It's so subjective and informed of deeply held values and desires that may or may not congrue with the world around you. It's like he bails himself out of the oncoming existential crisis at the end by committing to this idea the Holy Ghost will at the end of the day confirm that what you've come to in this subjective experience is "Truth." But that just begs the question about the experience with the HG confirmation and what that really tells you -- what knowledge it really gives you. Deconstruct the experience of confirmation by the HG at the end of the revelation experience and you will find that it is just as subjective as the revelation experience itself. You can't escape the subjectivity of the experience. There is no epistemic access to some objective realm that stands independent of what we subjectively experience.
Again quoting Bourdieu: "Religion can produce the objectivity that it produces only by producing the misrecognition of the limits of the knowledge that it makes possible."
Mormon Transhumanist Association - Joseph West
Joseph is a full-time parent and husband, and full-time student. He's married to his best friend and, together, they have two kids, a four year old boy and a two year old girl. He received a bachelors degree in philosophy from the University of Utah, and is currently a doctoral candidate in the Department of Sociology at the University of Arizona. Joseph is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and lives in Tucson, Arizona.
This blog does not necessarily represent the official positions of the Mormon Transhumanist Association or the views of any member of the association except its author.
