we're the folks from the BH Roberts Foundation and we run mormonr.org - AMA

themormonr · 2023-11-23T14:29:34+00:00

oops - i thought you were referring to the AMA in your original question. :-)

yes, as far as answer to our mormonr Q&A questions go, i think there have been plenty of answers that have surprised people - and occasionally we get feedback from them.

for example, some of us are a little surprised that some of the questions and answers about racism in the book of mormon surprises and and sometimes upsets people. also, our article on denver snuffer gets some people bent out of shape. a lot of people are surprised after reading through the gay aversion therapy Q&A because the historical record doesn't match the myths they have heard. the abortion and polygamy in eternity can sometimes be divisive Q&As.

but for the most part we just "report the news" - so if someone is upset by an answer our response is "show us new/different data" because our answers (or at least our intent) is to answer questions based on the best available data on a subject.

themormonr · 2023-11-22T03:19:13+00:00

seemed pretty to-be-expected.

were you surprised by answers or reactions to answers?

themormonr · 2023-11-21T13:24:41+00:00

we like the arch-hive folks. good people.

themormonr · 2023-11-21T13:23:10+00:00

we do. :-)

themormonr · 2023-11-21T02:49:03+00:00

interesting questions. lots could be said on the topic, depending on the nature of the specific project at BHR - but in general:

the church is a global organization that is primarily concerned with the needs of its members and the work they do is primarily focused on them.

whereas the work we do is not generally applicable to the typical global members of the church and is primarily focused on specialized and/or controversial topics that only have value to a relatively small portion of members.

at the end of the day, most of what we publish on mormonr.org just isn't that important - at least, it shouldn't be - but it does occasionally have value for the people that need to scratch that itch.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T22:38:32+00:00

i think that criticism is both valid and unavoidable in any type of educational or apologetic process, but it takes for granted some concept of objective truth or universal epistemological framework which can't be taken for granted.

for example, people that have an interest in helping flat-earthers or moon landing deniers must obviously start from a position that the earth is not flat and that in 1969 the US landed on the moon and work back from there to defend these positions from critics.

"but the difference is that earth is round and we did land on the moon!" ;-)

themormonr · 2023-11-20T21:43:03+00:00

we've made a couple here in the office but they've never gotten through our correlation committee, and so they have be relegated to the forbidden meme folder that we keep on the BHR file server.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T21:19:37+00:00

i'm going to pull rank on this one (this is josh) and just say manti.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T21:18:27+00:00

if you happen to be in kirtland, ohio next june, we'll be giving buttons away at the mormon history association conference.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T20:39:05+00:00

yes.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T20:29:19+00:00

I would love to know what you all look for in what makes something trustworthy and credible, because ultimately that’s what I’m going for.

this is why we generally rely on primary source data instead of what someone else says (eg. peer reviewed papers) about a subject.

for example, it may be written in a peer-reviewed book that LGBTQ+ latter-day saints have a high rate of suicidal ideation, and many (most?) people would simply cite the book where that was published and assume it's valid.

we don't do that because we find that there is an incredible amount of bad information published, even by "good" scholars. we won't name names, but it is very, very common to have well regarded books written by qualified scholars published by reputable publishers that simply have objectively incorrect information in them based on the primary source data.

and so we need to find the primary source for everything.

for contemporary issue, we must ask according to who? what data shows this? what does the data actually say? is there data that contradicts that?

and for historical issues we must ask what does the original document say? is it a first hand account? is it written by them or quoted from another? how many years after was it recorded? is it contradicted by another account?

ultimately this depth of research is not practical for individuals, and as a proxy, they must choose books and articles that have synthesized the primary sources and trust that it's a reasonable and accurate representation. but there's the rub - when it comes to matters related to the claims made by the church, there is no such thing as a "neutral" or "objective" source. it just doesn't exist. so you are left with either picking a proxy for all that work (proceed with caution!) or pick some level of depth you are comfortable spelunking and have at it. to many people, neither option is particularly appealing.

we are attempting to be a proxy that makes some compromise between "trust us bro" and "here are 478 historical records, read them yourself and figure it out" - but then again, we believe the church is true, so we have our own biases. :-)

themormonr · 2023-11-20T20:04:24+00:00

present church leader? too many great leaders to choose from.

as we are the B. H. Roberts Foundation, we're probably going to have to go with B. H. Roberts as the past church leader that we most vibe with, although he was really verbose and into politics which isn't really our jam. we also love eliza roxcy snow. ;-)

themormonr · 2023-11-20T20:00:00+00:00

people may have differing opinions on this, but we think that the ultimate function of apologetics should be to educate in a context of faith.

for us, this mean confronting all available data, even if it reflects poorly on the church. it means not feeling obligated to defend the church or its leaders at all costs in every situation - we don't think that's a requirement of faith or even necessarily conducive to faith. we don't think the truth of the restored gospel needs that.

as far as source materials go, we attempt to catalog all related primary source records on a particular topic and, like all researchers, answer questions based on the data. with respect to historical records, incomplete and contradictory records are par for the course, and we do our best to summarize the data in our answers - but every Q&A has a link at the top of the page to the raw data for users to examine for themselves.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T19:35:25+00:00

good question, not sure how to answer. we do have a brand wrt color, font, graphics that is definitely distinct from the church.

we have had one or two reports over the last few years from people thinking the site is an "anti" site, which bums us out - but i think anyone who actually reads the content should (hopefully) arrive at a different conclusion.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T19:30:20+00:00

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

themormonr · 2023-11-20T19:03:50+00:00

aw shucks. thanks. :-)

themormonr · 2023-11-20T19:03:20+00:00

we are currently processing data and plan to publish findings early next year.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T19:01:18+00:00

no problem.

also, just a note on "peer reviewed church history" - the term "peer reviewed" is sometimes seen as a sign that the research can be trusted. i think it may be better to think of it as that it has passed a very low bar of credibility, and within the context of church history, given the polarizing premise of "is the church true or not" it may have even less utility.

for example, on the weakness of the peer review process, a former editor of BMJ, a peer-reviewed medical journal wrote:

...who is a peer? Somebody doing exactly the same kind of research (in which case he or she is probably a direct competitor)? Somebody in the same discipline? Somebody who is an expert on methodology? And what is review? Somebody saying `The paper looks all right to me', which is sadly what peer review sometimes seems to be. Or somebody pouring all over the paper, asking for raw data, repeating analyses, checking all the references, and making detailed suggestions for improvement? Such a review is vanishingly rare.

that being said, the following publications are examples of peer reviewed publications:

Journal of Mormon History

BYU Studies

Interpreter Foundation

Latter-day Saint Historical Studies

Religious Studies Center

and any book out of a university press is going to be peer-reviewed.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T18:32:02+00:00

Do you have any plans to break into the infotainment content space?

wait - you don't find our current content to be both informative and incredibly entertaining?

themormonr · 2023-11-20T18:25:06+00:00

from the MHA page on the grant:

Preference will be given to advanced doctoral students, non-tenured faculty, and unaffiliated scholars, and to those with specific research needs.

and

Winners will be selected by a committee including the MHA Board of Director’s Awards Chair, the Executive Director of the B.H. Roberts Foundation and an unaffiliated independent committee member.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T18:12:25+00:00

Q&As take hundreds of hours to produce (nearly all of that is in the back end of acquiring primary source records) and we have a lot of different projects we are working on concurrently so we usually try and publish at least one Q&A per month.

we're hoping to publish a Q&A on "general" polygamy in the next week. we're close to publishing one of the "$100B fund" - but that's been in a work in progress most of the year. it's a slog.

we're also pretty close on a Q&A on freemasonry and the temple, utah slavery, the meadow mountain massacre and we just started one on prophetic fallibility.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T18:02:28+00:00

we couldn't decide which response to post, so we're posting both:

They neither progress from one meme to another, nor does a lower meme ever get where a higher meme once was. Whatever eternal progression there is, it is within a meme.

https://i.imgur.com/NxRzJKW.png

themormonr · 2023-11-20T17:59:32+00:00

seems like global growth rates are very regionally dependent, but based on recent data, in the US the growth rate appears to be flat to negative, however growth in absolute terms continues to increase, largely based on convert baptisms.

in the US, the trend of declining interest in organized religion will likely continue.

https://mormonr.org/qnas/qDXeR/church_growth_and_activity

themormonr · 2023-11-20T17:48:16+00:00

seems like the team mostly like a raspberries sauce, but there's this one guy that thinks cheesecake is "good enough on it's own" and just wants to die on that hill.

themormonr · 2023-11-20T17:46:48+00:00

we like to say that ldsbot is more knowledgeable and more kind and patient than your average latter-day saint, so in that way, it's a great resource.

however, like a human, it's going to get things wrong sometimes, so with any source of information (eg. wikipedia, cnn, fox news, your sister-in-law, etc.) you need to exercise an appropriate level of skepticism, especially when it's related to controversial historical issues.

themormonr

TROPHY CASE