Comment author:stcredzero
13 June 2012 07:32:31PM
4 points
[-]
Eh. Few "beliefs" and "belief-systems"—or more accurately, decision-policy-systems and social-signaling-systems—are as attractive as Mormonism. I don't think being Mormon is a sign of low epistemic standards so much as a sign of high instrumental rationality.
Without a single exception, every convert to Mormonism I've met (and this includes several colleagues) professes to have converted because they find Mormons to be kind, conscientious, and positively directed people.
I suspect this is how most people evaluate membership in a community. The "beliefs" and "belief-systems" are somewhat arbitrary to most, like the colors on the jerseys of sports teams.
In fact, in a population where most professed "beliefs" and "belief-systems" are mainly signals of group affiliation and less subjects for serious thought, this is arguably a more rational way of evaluating the desirability of group membership.
Comment author:bradleyt
13 June 2012 08:20:17PM
*
4 points
[-]
I grew up Mormon and attended BYU for a few years, and a lot of descriptions of Mormons I read on here are completely foreign to me. Knowing that the LDS Church was literally true was always an extremely important aspect of the religion when I grew up--it wasn't just about the community.
I suspect that the types of Mormons that people on LessWrong tend to come in contact with are very much outside the mainstream. While I can see that Mormon theology can be twisted to support a sort of trans-humanism, in my experience the typical Utah Mormon would find this very bizzarre.
= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Without a single exception, every convert to Mormonism I've met (and this includes several colleagues) professes to have converted because they find Mormons to be kind, conscientious, and positively directed people.
I suspect this is how most people evaluate membership in a community. The "beliefs" and "belief-systems" are somewhat arbitrary to most, like the colors on the jerseys of sports teams.
In fact, in a population where most professed "beliefs" and "belief-systems" are mainly signals of group affiliation and less subjects for serious thought, this is arguably a more rational way of evaluating the desirability of group membership.
I grew up Mormon and attended BYU for a few years, and a lot of descriptions of Mormons I read on here are completely foreign to me. Knowing that the LDS Church was literally true was always an extremely important aspect of the religion when I grew up--it wasn't just about the community.
I suspect that the types of Mormons that people on LessWrong tend to come in contact with are very much outside the mainstream. While I can see that Mormon theology can be twisted to support a sort of trans-humanism, in my experience the typical Utah Mormon would find this very bizzarre.