Comments on: The Original Position and the Council of Heaven I http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2006/01/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/ Exploring Mormon Thought, Culture, and Texts Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:35:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Faith-Promoting Rumor » 5 Years in the Bloggernacle: Some Random Thoughts http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2006/01/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-876 Faith-Promoting Rumor » 5 Years in the Bloggernacle: Some Random Thoughts Thu, 16 Dec 2010 02:11:30 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/2006/01/14/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-876 [...] My First Post [...] [...] My First Post [...]

]]> By: A Mormon Perspective on Social Justice | Faith-Promoting Rumor http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2006/01/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-875 A Mormon Perspective on Social Justice | Faith-Promoting Rumor Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:58:00 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/2006/01/14/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-875 [...] have written about the moral justification of liberal justice in two posts (here and a much updated version [...] [...] have written about the moral justification of liberal justice in two posts (here and a much updated version [...]

]]> By: The Mormon Rawls Project: The Original Position and the Council in Heaven I | Faith-Promoting Rumor http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2006/01/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-874 The Mormon Rawls Project: The Original Position and the Council in Heaven I | Faith-Promoting Rumor Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:05:55 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/2006/01/14/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-874 [...] Authors note: The following is the second in my Mormon Rawls Project Series. It is also the expansion of my first ever post here at FPR. [...] [...] Authors note: The following is the second in my Mormon Rawls Project Series. It is also the expansion of my first ever post here at FPR. [...]

]]> By: Chris H. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2006/01/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-871 Chris H. Sun, 15 Jan 2006 23:01:49 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/2006/01/14/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-871 John: I do not necessarily assume that those in the council of heaven are bound by a veil of ignorance per se. However I do not think that those in the council are aware of such things as there wealth, geographical location, or race. Based on such statements as the Proclamation on the Family I would assume that they are aware of their gender if gender is a central part of who we are spiritually. However, wealth, race, and our geographical locations are not of spiritual significance. Along these lines I would reject the idea that those born in the US. (or in other locations where the Church is abundant) are somehow there because they were somehow more valiant in the pre-existence. While we now reject the false claim that blacks were denied the priesthood because they were fence-sitters in the pre-existence (an idea which was nothing other than ad hoc justification for an unjustifiable policy), we should also reject the idea that some of us are in privileged positions in this world because of our actions in the pre-existence. Much of what Rawls tries to do is undermine the idea that some deserve to be more well off and others deserve to be disadvantaged. I think that his project can be applied to the council and out position here on earth. As for foreordination, I do not think that being ignorant of ones social status would be relevant when in comes to one being foreordained to be a prophet or a great high priest. Maybe I am just a bit confused about the whole idea of foreordination, but it seems to me that ones foreordination would be somewhat vague in order to ensure that individuals have agency and are tested. Mogget: Rawls thinks that people in general would be willing to enter into the kind of contract that he envisions because such a conception of justice would benefit everyone. However, not all would be willing to give up there privileged status. Hence we see Hummers and starvation in the same country. BTW, a purpose of the veil of ignorance is that if forces the participants to consider that they could be rich or poor, black or white, or male or female. The idea is that you would not choose principles if favor of male priviledge if you knew that you might actually be a women. John: I do not necessarily assume that those in the council of heaven are bound by a veil of ignorance per se. However I do not think that those in the council are aware of such things as there wealth, geographical location, or race. Based on such statements as the Proclamation on the Family I would assume that they are aware of their gender if gender is a central part of who we are spiritually. However, wealth, race, and our geographical locations are not of spiritual significance. Along these lines I would reject the idea that those born in the US. (or in other locations where the Church is abundant) are somehow there because they were somehow more valiant in the pre-existence. While we now reject the false claim that blacks were denied the priesthood because they were fence-sitters in the pre-existence (an idea which was nothing other than ad hoc justification for an unjustifiable policy), we should also reject the idea that some of us are in privileged positions in this world because of our actions in the pre-existence. Much of what Rawls tries to do is undermine the idea that some deserve to be more well off and others deserve to be disadvantaged. I think that his project can be applied to the council and out position here on earth.

As for foreordination, I do not think that being ignorant of ones social status would be relevant when in comes to one being foreordained to be a prophet or a great high priest. Maybe I am just a bit confused about the whole idea of foreordination, but it seems to me that ones foreordination would be somewhat vague in order to ensure that individuals have agency and are tested.

Mogget: Rawls thinks that people in general would be willing to enter into the kind of contract that he envisions because such a conception of justice would benefit everyone. However, not all would be willing to give up there privileged status. Hence we see Hummers and starvation in the same country. BTW, a purpose of the veil of ignorance is that if forces the participants to consider that they could be rich or poor, black or white, or male or female. The idea is that you would not choose principles if favor of male priviledge if you knew that you might actually be a women.

]]> By: Mogget http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2006/01/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-873 Mogget Sat, 14 Jan 2006 18:52:14 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/2006/01/14/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-873 Hey Chris, I wondered when you were going to pop up here! Good to see you, man. Here's my question: Was John Rawls the guy who wrote the Fourth Gospel, the Epistles, or Revelation? Oh wait.... Second try. Did John Rawls think that folks who knew their own status were unable to make a good social contract? Or were they just unwilling? Hey Chris,

I wondered when you were going to pop up here! Good to see you, man.

Here’s my question: Was John Rawls the guy who wrote the Fourth Gospel, the Epistles, or Revelation?

Oh wait…. Second try.

Did John Rawls think that folks who knew their own status were unable to make a good social contract? Or were they just unwilling?

]]> By: John C. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithpromotingrumor/2006/01/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-872 John C. Sat, 14 Jan 2006 17:03:37 +0000 http://faithpromotingrumor.wordpress.com/2006/01/14/the-original-position-and-the-council-of-heaven-i/#comment-872 Chris, I am glad that you finally made it here. I am curious about your assertion regarding people in the council of heaven being bound by a veil of ignorance regarding their eventual embodiment. How do you fit this with the LDS theology (folk or otherwise) of foreordination? Chris, I am glad that you finally made it here. I am curious about your assertion regarding people in the council of heaven being bound by a veil of ignorance regarding their eventual embodiment. How do you fit this with the LDS theology (folk or otherwise) of foreordination?

]]>