FAIR's 2011 Symposium

[LA Ute]

Here's the breakdown of this year's event:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7...?s_cid=Email-4

I will be in Salt Lake next week and will try to drop in. Some of the topics look interesting.

[Moliere]

Here's the breakdown of this year's event:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7...?s_cid=Email-4

I will be in Salt Lake next week and will try to drop in. Some of the topics look interesting.

I thought symposia were forbidden as per the CHoI....you'd think FAIR would fall in line.

[scottie]

Here's the breakdown of this year's event:

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/7...?s_cid=Email-4

I will be in Salt Lake next week and will try to drop in. Some of the topics look interesting.

I noticed the author of that article, who will also be one of the presenters, used the terms "zombie-like" and "sorry episode" to refer to the Spaulding theory of the BOM; do you think that's sometimes the tone of that conference?

[Jeff Lebowski]

I noticed the author of that article, who will also be one of the presenters, used the terms "zombie-like" and "sorry episode" to refer to the Spaulding theory of the BOM; do you think that's sometimes the tone of that conference?

That is very much the style of the author of the article (Daniel Peterson). Par for the course for the new Des News.

I thought symposia were forbidden as per the CHoI....you'd think FAIR would fall in line.

Exactly. The lack of consistency drives me nuts.

[LA Ute]

I noticed the author of that article, who will also be one of the presenters, used the terms "zombie-like" and "sorry episode" to refer to the Spaulding theory of the BOM; do you think that's sometimes the tone of that conference?

Like JL said, it's the way Dan Peterson talks when he's writing in the DesNews LDS edition, or whatever they call it. Then again, scottie, if you're going to talk about tone, you've got to consider the tone of the Sunstone symposia over the years. (Disclaimer: I have been to a number of Sunstone symposia but not to any FAIR symposia, so I can't comment on FAIR.)

[Green Monstah]

I noticed the author of that article, who will also be one of the presenters, used the terms "zombie-like" and "sorry episode" to refer to the Spaulding theory of the BOM; do you think that's sometimes the tone of that conference?

Not that it should matter much, but Dan Peterson is the sole reason I decided that Mormon apologetics was a waste of my time. The man comes off as a self-absorbed ass. He could be the greatest man in the world, but I dislike his attitude immensely.

I have a buddy with bonafide credentials (Masters in Theology from Yale) who left the apologetics movement for the same reason. DP wanted him to write a scathing article in response to a well-known ex-Mormon's view on the origins of the BOM that addressed none of the issues raised, but called into question the author's credentials.

Anyway, rant over.

I won't be attending.

[Northwestcoug]

Quote from last paragraph of the article:

Conference sessions run both days from 9 a.m. until 5:45 p.m., and each day will be packed with stimulating presentations. As in every previous conference, the closing presenter will be the aging FAIR warhorse Daniel Peterson, speaking, this year, on "Mormonism, Islam and the Question of Other Religions." His placement on the program is wise, since the audience will be walking out after the final session anyway.


Am I missing something? Daniel Peterson is the author of this article, right? And he's referencing himself on the symposium?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Quote from last paragraph of the article:

Conference sessions run both days from 9 a.m. until 5:45 p.m., and each day will be packed with stimulating presentations. As in every previous conference, the closing presenter will be the aging FAIR warhorse Daniel Peterson, speaking, this year, on "Mormonism, Islam and the Question of Other Religions." His placement on the program is wise, since the audience will be walking out after the final session anyway.


Am I missing something? Daniel Peterson is the author of this article, right? And he's referencing himself on the symposium?

I interpreted that as a little self-deprecating humor.

[Green Monstah]

Quote from last paragraph of the article:

Conference sessions run both days from 9 a.m. until 5:45 p.m., and each day will be packed with stimulating presentations. As in every previous conference, the closing presenter will be the aging FAIR warhorse Daniel Peterson, speaking, this year, on "Mormonism, Islam and the Question of Other Religions." His placement on the program is wise, since the audience will be walking out after the final session anyway.


Am I missing something? Daniel Peterson is the author of this article, right? And he's referencing himself on the symposium?

Shameless self-promoting ass.

[Donuthole]

I interpreted that as a little self-deprecating humor.

This. It was about the only way to acknowledge that the author of the article will also be a speaker at the symposium without saying "and the real reason I think you should come is because I"ll be speaking on blah blah". I thought it was a good way to broach the pseudo conflict of interest, though his presentation topic sounds extremely boring compared to some of the others, IMO.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Not that it should matter much, but Dan Peterson is the sole reason I decided that Mormon apologetics was a waste of my time. The man comes off as a self-absorbed ass. He could be the greatest man in the world, but I dislike his attitude immensely.

I have a buddy with bonafide credentials (Masters in Theology from Yale) who left the apologetics movement for the same reason. DP wanted him to write a scathing article in response to a well-known ex-Mormon's view on the origins of the BOM that addressed none of the issues raised, but called into question the author's credentials.

Anyway, rant over.

I won't be attending.

Have you informed the conference organizers yet? I am sure they will be crushed.

[Green Monstah]

Have you informed the conference organizers yet? I am sure they will be crushed.

Har. Har.

[LA Ute]

Maybe I'd better stay away from the FAIR conference. Attending might ruin the open- mindedness I've been learning here on CUF.

[Northwestcoug]

This. It was about the only way to acknowledge that the author of the article will also be a speaker at the symposium without saying "and the real reason I think you should come is because I"ll be speaking on blah blah". I thought it was a good way to broach the pseudo conflict of interest, though his presentation topic sounds extremely boring compared to some of the others, IMO.

That's what I thought. I'd love to hear their take on the Kinderhook plates.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Maybe I'd better stay away from the FAIR conference. Attending might ruin the open- mindedness I've been learning here on CUF.

I thought many of the paper titles looked fascinating. I would love to hear a report.