healing/recovery through venting?

[_wenglund]

I would say that the probability that he was lying is quite high, based on the evidence. So, the question about his sincere belief is moot. There are three options:

1. Joseph actually had plates that he translated.
2. Joseph was delusional and believed he had plates that he translated.
3. Joseph lied.

Given the way the rest of story works, the probability rests with option 3. I'm basing this on evidence, just as you base your belief that the sky is blue on the evidence.

Likewise, the same could be said about you lying or experiencing cognitive distortions about Joseph lying, based on the same evidence and reasoning. Here are the three options:

1. John actually has sufficient evidence that Joseph lied.
2. John was delusional (or suffering cognitive distortions) and believes that he has sufficient evidence that Joseph lied.
3. John lied.

From my perspective, the probability rests with option 2. And, from the perspective of other LDS, they may think the probability rests with option 3. This is based on the same kind of evidence for John's belief that Joseph lied.

And this can go back and forth and around and around. But, to what productive end?

To me, this kind of reasoning misses my point. When I speak of cognitive distortions, I am not suggesting that the cognitions aren't "RIGHT" or correct from a certain point of view. The "RIGHTNESS" of the cognitions could be vigerously debated endlessly. Rather, I am speaking to the lack of value or lack of functionality of the cognition (i.e does it WORK?). What benefit is there in being "RIGHT" (paticularly on matters of little significance in the whole scheme of things and that are highly debatable) if being "RIGHT" means living for months in hurt and anger and grief, and chancing causing hurt and anger and grief to others who may also believe they are "RIGHT"?

Granted, we each may come to different answers to this question depending upon the issue and its personal significants as well as the confidence levels that one has that they are "RIGHT", not to mention how their favored position compares with alternative points of view (options 1 & 2 above), etc. And that is okay.

I would say more, but I don't want to give things away.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_OUT OF MY MISERY]

I give away many things...like my time...my opinion....my heart and soul to many people...but some people will take your soul and chew it up and spit it right back at you...oh well...live and learn...

[_Runtu]

I would say that the probability that he was lying is quite high, based on the evidence. So, the question about his sincere belief is moot. There are three options:

1. Joseph actually had plates that he translated.
2. Joseph was delusional and believed he had plates that he translated.
3. Joseph lied.

Given the way the rest of story works, the probability rests with option 3. I'm basing this on evidence, just as you base your belief that the sky is blue on the evidence.

Likewise, the same could be said about you lying or experiencing cognitive distortions about Joseph lying, based on the same evidence and reasoning. Here are the three options:

1. John actually has sufficient evidence that Joseph lied.
2. John was delusional (or suffering cognitive distortions) and believes that he has sufficient evidence that Joseph lied.
3. John lied.

From my perspective, the probability rests with option 2. And, from the perspective of other LDS, they may think the probability rests with option 3. This is based on the same kind of evidence for John's belief that Joseph lied.

And this can go back and forth and around and around. But, to what productive end?

To me, this kind of reasoning misses my point. When I speak of cognitive distortions, I am not suggesting that the cognitions aren't "RIGHT" or correct from a certain point of view. The "RIGHTNESS" of the cognitions could be vigerously debated endlessly. Rather, I am speaking to the lack of value or lack of functionality of the cognition (i.e does it WORK?). What benefit is there in being "RIGHT" (paticularly on matters of little significance in the whole scheme of things and that are highly debatable) if being "RIGHT" means living for months in hurt and anger and grief, and chancing causing hurt and anger and grief to others who may also believe they are "RIGHT"?

Granted, we each may come to different answers to this question depending upon the issue and its personal significants as well as the confidence levels that one has that they are "RIGHT", not to mention how their favored position compares with alternative points of view (options 1 & 2 above), etc. And that is okay.

I would say more, but I don't want to give things away.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

This is nothing more than a dysfunctional game. Just like your appeal to postmodernism, you are attempting to invalidate the means for arriving at truth. I'm sure you'll say I'm putting words in your mouth, but all your approach does is obscure what is true, and in fact, you suggest that what is true is less important how you feel. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the one true church.

I'm tired of this game. I must say you're the first person I've ever met who used cognitive therapy as a bludgeon.

[_harmony]

This is nothing more than a dysfunctional game.

This is where I say "I told you so". Wade likes this board because people here havne't yet learned to ignore him. It strokes his ego when he can get people to play his game.

Just like your appeal to postmodernism, you are attempting to invalidate the means for arriving at truth. I'm sure you'll say I'm putting words in your mouth, but all your approach does is obscure what is true, and in fact, you suggest that what is true is less important how you feel.

Well, that's what the church teaches. What's important is how the investigator feels, not that the church is intentionally concealing significant parts of the doctrine and pertinent church history.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the one true church.

But accurate, nonetheless.

I'm tired of this game.

Welcome to the Tired of Wade's Games club. The group grows larger every day.

I must say you're the first person I've ever met who used cognitive therapy as a bludgeon.

I doubt Wade is qualified to use cognitive therapy or any other kind of therapy. He can hang out a shingle but that doesn't make him qualified.

[_wenglund]

This is nothing more than a dysfunctional game. Just like your appeal to postmodernism, you are attempting to invalidate the means for arriving at truth. I'm sure you'll say I'm putting words in your mouth, but all your approach does is obscure what is true, and in fact, you suggest that what is true is less important how you feel. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the one true church.

I'm tired of this game. I must say you're the first person I've ever met who used cognitive therapy as a bludgeon.

I painstakingly correct your repeated misunderstanding, and rationally challenge your point of view, and then turn your own reasoning back on you, and somehow I am playing a dysfunctional game, and you aren't; and somehow I am appealing to postmodernism, and you aren't; and somehow I am attempting to obscure what is true, and you aren't; and somehow I am suggesting that truth is less important than how you feel, and you aren't; and somehow I am "bludgeoning" and you aren't.

I suppose that with your self-centric way of thinking and caring, that double standard may work for you--or so you suppose.

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_harmony]

This is nothing more than a dysfunctional game. Just like your appeal to postmodernism, you are attempting to invalidate the means for arriving at truth. I'm sure you'll say I'm putting words in your mouth, but all your approach does is obscure what is true, and in fact, you suggest that what is true is less important how you feel. Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the one true church.

I'm tired of this game. I must say you're the first person I've ever met who used cognitive therapy as a bludgeon.

I painstakingly correct your repeated misunderstanding, and rationally challenge your point of view, and then turn your own reasoning back on you, and somehow I am playing a dysfunctional game, and you aren't; and somehow I am appealing to postmodernism, and you aren't; and somehow I am attempting to obscure what is true, and you aren't; and somehow I am suggesting that truth is less important than how you feel, and you aren't; and somehow I am "bludgeoning" and you aren't.

I suppose that with your self-centric way of thinking and caring, that double standard may work for you--or so you suppose.

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Self-centricism is necessary when dealing with you in order to survive, Wade. You take self-centricism to another whole level, usually reserved for narcissists and megalomaniacs. You use words like rational, reasoning, and truth, and yet still what comes out of your brain is the original, dysfunctional drivel we've learned to expect from you. Take the break you promised us. We need to air out the stench of sulfer anyway.