[001]
209.20.103.246
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"When a fact hurts someone\\\'s feelings, that doesn\\\'t make it untrue.\\\" Quite right, but not especially useful when trying to persuade.
When someone considers something sacred the blunt approach is almost always unwise. If you wish to convince someone that your view is correct, a better approach is almost always to build a realtionship of trust on beliefs that you have in common, and only then approach the points on which you disagree. Tact is worth more than truth, at least to begin with, and if a person respects and trusts you (and feels that you return that respect and trust) then they are more likely to listen to your arguments.
It also nearly always pays to be open-minded and to have a humble opinion of one\\\'s own ability to analyze and detect the truth. If you use the good faith approach that someone may indeed have good reasons for believing as they do, rather than prejudging their beliefs as uninformed and/or contemptible, then a real dialogue may develop and you may come away learning something you didn\\\'t know before.
And of course, it\\\'s important to use the right forum. In between articles on the Lord of the Rings and Bladerunner is not really the proper palce for a theological debate. That is the real reason that the analysis was deleted, not a desire to prevent hurt feelings.
You would be screaming it from the rooftops if it were genuine?
I very much doubt you have actually read any more than tiny out-of-context excerpts of the Book of Mormon, and I am certain that you have done nothing to explore the modern LDS view of its claims. You didn\\\'t even read the link I posted above about genetic studies. You dismissed Mormon views as biased, uninformed, and contemptible without actually exploring them in any way.
How can you scream \\\"falsehood\\\" before you\\\'ve fully examined the evidence?
How can you refute arguments you haven\\\'t even read?
Is that really the attitude of someone who loves truth like nothing else?
When someone considers something sacred the blunt approach is almost always unwise. If you wish to convince someone that your view is correct, a better approach is almost always to build a realtionship of trust on beliefs that you have in common, and only then approach the points on which you disagree. Tact is worth more than truth, at least to begin with, and if a person respects and trusts you (and feels that you return that respect and trust) then they are more likely to listen to your arguments.
It also nearly always pays to be open-minded and to have a humble opinion of one\\\'s own ability to analyze and detect the truth. If you use the good faith approach that someone may indeed have good reasons for believing as they do, rather than prejudging their beliefs as uninformed and/or contemptible, then a real dialogue may develop and you may come away learning something you didn\\\'t know before.
And of course, it\\\'s important to use the right forum. In between articles on the Lord of the Rings and Bladerunner is not really the proper palce for a theological debate. That is the real reason that the analysis was deleted, not a desire to prevent hurt feelings.
You would be screaming it from the rooftops if it were genuine?
I very much doubt you have actually read any more than tiny out-of-context excerpts of the Book of Mormon, and I am certain that you have done nothing to explore the modern LDS view of its claims. You didn\\\'t even read the link I posted above about genetic studies. You dismissed Mormon views as biased, uninformed, and contemptible without actually exploring them in any way.
How can you scream \\\"falsehood\\\" before you\\\'ve fully examined the evidence?
How can you refute arguments you haven\\\'t even read?
Is that really the attitude of someone who loves truth like nothing else?
