- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Now you are all making me think symbolism is bad. I can accept that symbols can be used for nefarious ends. So where does that leave us. Literalism is bad because it forces belief in the unbelievable. Symbolism is bad because it can be use for disreputable purposes. Guess I am going to have to go back to my logical approach, and just accept things as they are. If it acts like a duck, and walks like a duck, it is a duck. Trying to make it a swan is futile.
These comments make you think symbolism is bad? A little projection, maybe?
Cadence wrote:Now you are all making me think symbolism is bad. I can accept that symbols can be used for nefarious ends. So where does that leave us. Literalism is bad because it forces belief in the unbelievable. Symbolism is bad because it can be use for disreputable purposes.
Guess I am going to have to go back to my logical approach, and just accept things as they are. If it acts like a duck, and walks like a duck, it is a duck. Trying to make it a swan is futile.
Hi Cadence. I’m sorry. It was not my intent to confuse.
Hmm, symbolism is like marriage or like a parent.
Very very powerful because it is attached to our primal core of nearly all our actions and decisions in our genetics(cortex)as well as connection to memory. Because of this connection to those traits it bears incredible power. Even more so then sex.
This connection is the most primal of all connections.
It can be welded for good or bad just like marriage or parenting.
Great joy or great sorry and anger. Because if such it needs to be treated sacredly and respected of each other or battles of words and wars will rage.
It’s not to be trifled with. But so many people are so unaware of this force that drives them and why they are acting.
But leadership has known for thousands of years and used it to draw good and ill.
To shape public minds to their policy weather good or bad.
An example was the civil war. In the early years hardly anyone was signing up. To change that they used a powerful symbol with many Americans to draw their emotions to their cause. That symbol was Santa Claus or Saint Nick.
It worked, with their emotions now connected to their cause many many signed up in the north.
It’s complex, those it power wield it to what ever cause they believe in. We wield it individually in our lives to get us through tough situations. Or to endure, we remember those connections even in a very subconscious level.
They bind our actions and drive us for good or bad.
The point is its powerful and not to be trifled with.
It can be used to help us endure life or shackle us to our emotions and past.
The more you know and learn about it the more you can control it and not key it control you.
When you have that control you can use it in powerful ways to help you in life that are known only to you.
It’s a most personal and private matter. One we each hold most dear and scared individually understood.
Symbols are inherently about meaning. To create a symbol you take something and divorce it from its original purpose to create new meaning. So it’s only natural that symbols can be used for both good and evil. In that way they are simply mirrors of our inner morals and our choices. Language is a symbolic system that can be used for good and evil. In a way even stories themselves are symbolic, even if they are true, because stories are conveyed using a symbolic system and are inevitably colored by our own perceptions and intent. Stories are just sounds or squiggles; their true nature is what they mean to us. A scientific experiment is an act of faith, and the resulting scientific paper is a story relating a set of occurrences and facts using a symbolic system. The conclusions taken from the experiment, or the story about it, are acts of interpretation (interpreting symbols) that create meaning. Granted, the methods of science limit the creativity inherent in the symbolic system we’re forced to use to communicate, but you can’t get away from it entirely. Daeruin wrote:Symbols are inherently about meaning. To create a symbol you take something and divorce it from its original purpose to create new meaning. So it’s only natural that symbols can be used for both good and evil. In that way they are simply mirrors of our inner morals and our choices. Language is a symbolic system that can be used for good and evil. In a way even stories themselves are symbolic, even if they are true, because stories are conveyed using a symbolic system and are inevitably colored by our own perceptions and intent. Stories are just sounds or squiggles; their true nature is what they mean to us. A scientific experiment is an act of faith, and the resulting scientific paper is a story relating a set of occurrences and facts using a symbolic system. The conclusions taken from the experiment, or the story about it, are acts of interpretation (interpreting symbols) that create meaning. Granted, the methods of science limit the creativity inherent in the symbolic system we’re forced to use to communicate, but you can’t get away from it entirely.
That is the beauty of symbols. They have no real meaning or purpose but what you choose to give them. Just like words.
The only real meaning and power is what you choose to give it it not and what connection it has to you individually in your life. The beauty is bi one can tell you what a symbol means, because it only has any meaning at all if it makes a connection to you and you assign what ever meaning that helps you through life to that event, person, thing, time or place.
I’m not sure I would go quite that far. What you say is true of personal symbols, but there are also cultural symbols and family symbols that have meanings passed down to us. To some degree such symbols affect us on a subconscious level. Language itself is a symbolic system. You can try to change the meaning of a word, and it might be meaningful to you, but if you can no longer communicate with those who don’t know or accept your personal meaning, that word loses some of its power. I think the power of seeing scriptural and gospel ideas as symbolic is partly in how it allows you to communicate and commune with those who don’t see the symbols the same way while still getting personal value out of it. Daeruin wrote:I’m not sure I would go quite that far. What you say is true of personal symbols, but there are also cultural symbols and family symbols that have meanings passed down to us. To some degree such symbols affect us on a subconscious level. Language itself is a symbolic system. You can try to change the meaning of a word, and it might be meaningful to you, but if you can no longer communicate with those who don’t know or accept your personal meaning, that word loses some of its power. I think the power of seeing scriptural and gospel ideas as symbolic is partly in how it allows you to communicate and commune with those who don’t see the symbols the same way while still getting personal value out of it.
True, but some people(well many) do not get anything out of non personal symbols. Because their is zero connection or emotional attachment attached to non personal symbols. When discussing non or personal symbols with others it’s strictly about education analysis. But no power because of no connection to no personal symbols. It becomes like a college professor type discussion but with no connection or attachment to it. At least for me and quite a few people I know that see no power for themselves in non personal.
I liked the OP. There is a lot that has become symbolic to me that used to be literal. I’m trying to think of one thing I still take literally. The only thing I can think of right now is the universal message: “Be excellent to each other.”
The rest are symbols and frameworks to help us achieve that one greater goal.
Quote:“Be excellent to each other.”
I gave a talk once in a YSA ward when I was a High Councilor about charity. I used that quote as the foundation of the talk.
The congregation loved the fact that I referenced a movie that normally wouldn’t be mentioned in church.
Old-Timer wrote:life is about progression, not just salvation.
If one is not progressing, they are not saved. Damnation is the opposite and it is about stopping progress.It is an important point in that is we choose stop our progression we are choosing to damn ourselves.
What is NOT purely symbolic – * Our scriptures
* Our ceremonies
* The feelings many members have.
(No, I’m not being literalist here, and will explain more later)
What can be looked at as reality minus the symbolic value –
* The organisation and people
* The physical property
* The help progs – work, addiction, charitable support
* Service
* Mission(aries)
* The priesthood ban
* Excommunication
* Music
* Dress code
Again – kind of being controversial but will explain.
So why do I say scriptures, ceremonies and feelings are not purely
symbolic?
Firstly, we are confusing signifier and signified. All of these are very
real to people, regardless of their origin, meaning or effect.
Secondly, the ceremonies and scriptures have an existence on the
physical plane. It doesn’t matter if one believes in them, neither
require belief to continue to exist. Feelings also have physical effect
regardless of the (non-)feeling/apathy of others.
Thirdly, all these three contain instruction which is not symbolic –
there is no symbolism really in telling folk not to murder, steal or
lie. The scriptures are not purely story or symbol. Feelings are also a
major factor in us avoiding evil, and in helping others.
Fourthly, the scriptures and ceremonies are historic regardless of their
origins. They are historical documents, products of their time, beyond
the supposed history in them.
What do I mean? It is INDISPUTABLE to both believer and skeptic that both the Bible and Book of Mormon are historical documents.
A historical document need not be a completely factual account.
The BoM is indisputably historical to both groups in that it is a) transcribed in the 19th century, b) uses millenia old material (Bible) and c) has influenced the course of American history, particularly the Rockies.
The Bible, likewise, is a product of the time it was written in (Classical times), refers back to much older material, and has had a COLOSSAL effect on global history.
We can dispute if the Nephites or Abraham existed. We cannot seriously dispute that Caesar Augustus, Babylon or Joseph Smith existed. We can also make historical interpretations of the script and language used in each.
One last point and I will shut up! Why was the priesthood ban NOT symbolic?
1) On an organizational basis, blacks could not take part in certain ordinations, or take leadership positions. Anyone who did do this did so unofficially and against the rules – so they were void. (It did happen in West Africa BTW) Think of this as a club perhaps.
2) The rule existed regardless of its origin, and was enforced, so was real in that sense. 1978 was real, regardless of whether God ordained it or not.
So whether right or wrong, divine or not – this ugly rule existed as a reality.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.