This paper investigates the misconstrued values and ontological frameworks in which persons are enculturated, and how this can disempower the individuals and societies from acting towards their objective goods. In concordance with this body, the values of agency/ liberty, identity and personal narratives will be used to extrapolate the complexities of intentionality within the nature of knowledge and knowing.
I will be using a personal story from my time serving as a missionary in the Canada, Calgary mission for the Church of Jesus-Christ of Latter-Day Saints. This occurred from January 2000 on through to January 2002. This experience takes place the second summer of service in the southern regions of Calgary proper. However, in order to understand the context of this story, one needs to first understand the context of the religion itself, as seen through my eyes.
I was raised an active member of the (LDS) church. As a growing boy within this culture there are certain expectations attached: baptism at eight years of age, receive the aaronic priesthood at twelve (in the office of deacon), ordained to the office of teacher at fourteen, ordained to the office of priest at sixteen. At nineteen years old, one receives the melchezidec priesthood, with the office of an elder. This in turn signals manhood as attained within the church, and acts as a right of passage. Receiving the higher priesthood happens before one can then enter into the temple and receive one’s endowments. Here, members enter into holy covenants before god and men. After receiving all of the above, it is expected young men will serve full-time missions for the duration of 24 months. This service can occur anywhere throughout the world, and is viewed by members as a capstone to the aforementioned growth process. For example, those who don’t serve missions as expected, are looked down upon among the active membership as less, and in many cases, not worthy. There is truth to this in that, to a large degree, one must be vetted as worthy to serve a mission. This worthiness includes abstaining from alcohol, coffee, black tea, fornication or anything like it. There are also a myriad of other obligations and responsibilities one must do, including home teaching, preparing, blessing and passing the sacrament, service, daily scripture study and personal prayers, involvement in family prayers, and on. Any lack of devout involvement is a sin, and must be repented of with godly sorrow as sins of omission. This devotion is requisite before missionary service.
Regardless of all of the required responsibilities and progress above, and perhaps to a degree because of them, I anxiously anticipated missionary service and even wore this aspiration as a badge of honour; much like many lay members, especially leadership. My identity, my sense of self and purpose were intricately interwoven amongst the many socio-cultural complexities I had in sum experienced. My very thought architectures led me further toward cult indoctrination. For example, I held this missionary service in such regard as to not make any plans after missionary service; as it would be a distraction from the dedication. I was, in short, a product of the church—it was church above all.
As mentioned above, this particular story occurred my second summer in the mission field. I had been in various leadership positions up to this point and was serving in this capacity at the time. As a leader one is required to train and lead fellow missionaries in the work, with expectations and responsibilites delegated from the mission leadership and from those around them.
I was 20 years old and it was a day like any other. I woke at six thirty for personal scripture study for two and half hours, followed by companionship study for the last hour. Companionship study usually consisted of training a fellow missionary in the scriptures, discussions, and commitment pattern. Most elders rarely did this. I was serving in the southern Calgary family wards (there are singles wards to help facilitate the marrying off and fulfillment of the plan of happiness through the family unit) and training another missionary in the process.
I can’t remember the specifics that followed the remainder of the day, as it was completely typical i’m sure: tracting (knocking doors), lunch, member visits, preparation for meetings, member dinner . . then came the atypical phone call that evening.
I received this distressed phone call from two elders serving in a couple of the Okotoks wards (congregations) further south of the city, who reported that a couple in their late forties/early fifties, who had firmly decided to be baptized previously, were having second thoughts on their baptisms the following day. The elders were unable to resolve their concerns, and asked if i could help.
It was a beautiful night as my companion and I drove south. I remember seeing the stars, bright in the clear sky, appreciating the simple splendour of it. This, whilst simultaneously constructing a mental map of what possible concerns the couple may have, and how best to resolve them.
Upon arrival, we were warmly welcomed into the couple’s home and were guided to the kitchen table where the disheveled elders sat. Looking back now, it’s almost comical to see the diverging effect our new presence brought with it; utter relief on the elders faces, and a stark rise in apprehension and loss of confidence in the couple. I did my best to comfort both and provide a safe space for dialogue and decision making. I asked a smattering of non-related questions of the couple, and as a result, stroke up a casual conversation before entering the nitty gritty. After a handful of minutes, I finally asked, “So, what’s holding you back from being baptized tomorrow?”
The couple looked at each other, then back to me, and said, “We just don’t know if Joseph Smith was a prophet.”
I was completely unflustered, and responded, “Well let’s see if we can’t figure this out, and then you can know what to do.”
What i did, and what follows, was known as the “spirit dialogue,” within my mission area:
moroni 10: 4-5 . .give background, have investigators read verse: Moroni was a prophet who saw the destruction of his entire people and saw us in our day. He wrote to us to exhort us to listen to the truth of his story and warn us against what may come if ignored.
4. . . when ye shall receive things, I would exhort you that ye would ask G- -, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
5. And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.
explanation: in these verse we know that by the power of Holy Ghost, we can know the truth of all things. But what is the Holy Ghost? What does he do?
john 15:26
give background as above, i read the verse
Here, Christ is instructing his apostles on the spirit.
26. But when the Comforter is come, whom i will send unto from the Father, even theSpirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
explanation: Here we find out the Holy Ghost is a comforter, a warm blanket even, and he is given a title, that of the Spirit of Truth. And he is to testify of Christ.
galatians 5: 22-23
give background, they read the verse.
Here the apostle Paul is writing a letter to the Galatians. They were apostatizing from the church and had forgotten how to recognize and be led by the Comforter. In these verses Paul compares the spirit to a tree, and how to recognize the spirit to the fruits of the tree.
22. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23. Meekness, temperance. Against such there is no law.
explanation: When we have these feelings and mental states we can know the Spirit is testifying to us of truth.
how about a test?
I’m going to testify of jesus christ, that he is the son of G- -, and the saviour of the world.
-testify
pause
- . . . what are you feeling right now?
-identify fruits: “What you’re feeling right now are the fruits of the Spirit, it is his role to testify of truth. When you feel these, it means jesus is the christ, the son of G- -.
okay, how about another test?
Now i’m going to testify that joseph smith was a prophet and that the book of mormon was inspired by G- -, and is another testament of jesus christ.
-testify
- pause -
- pause -
. . . what are you feeling right now?
-identify fruits.
-explain they’re feeling the fruits of the spirit because joseph smith was a prophet and that the book of mormon was inspired by G- -, and is another testament of jesus christ.
commit: Will you follow the example of the savior, and be baptized (state date)?
As we finished the dialogue, everyone appeared to be at peace.
Or so I remember.
It could have just as easily been that the couple was still quite leery of the situation. It may have been their apprehension was overshadowed by the elders happiness. It’s hard to tell without misremembering events. But I don’t remember it that way.
On the other hand, they were baptized the following night and they were all smiles throughout the process.
Where the philosophical conundrum lies for me in this story is in the freedom, or agency, I had at the time in my position of leadership. By all intensive purposes, I was empowered. I was the leader there, holding most of the ‘power’ cards. I came to “rescue,” the situation and bring the sweet couple unto christ. But, in my enculturation, was I acting in freedom with liberty, or was I oppressed and disempowered by the ontological and pedagogical frameworks I had been raised in? I couldn’t see anything but what was taught me, and what I taught others at the time. I had, after all, been instructed heavily in this since I was in diapers; every day in my home by my parents, once a week in church, and twice every week in church since I was twelve. I had been taught the theology of many religions as a sounding board over the course of many years, but through the lens of the Latter-Day Saints. Did i lack true agency, or liberty due to the life narrative I had adopted?
I propose this was a highly disempowered state, though my intentionality was elementarily genuine. I really did want the utmost of happiness for the people I came into contact with at the time. This altruism has not dissipated. And, at the time, happiness was the plan of salvation through christ jesus. I was a cog in the LDS machine. Not inherently a bad thing, if I had indeed made the case to myself with no external pressures, or at least minimal pressure.
Cass Sunstein and Richard Thaler report in their widely read volume, Nudge, that namely, this agency is vital to the functioning of society. But, we often make mistakes in our logic and within our social constructs, this requires nudges to keep us on track to live lives worth living, according to our own personal narratives. Although traditional economists would report us logical creatures, constantly running internal cost-benefit analysis’ to reach our best outcomes as termed homo-economicus’; we are far from them. The decisions we make are mostly coloured with emotionality and a littering of mental short-cuts.
We commit many mental errors through these shortcuts, shortcuts such as standardizing, the affect heuristic, cult indoctrination, the argument from ignorance, confabulation, the availability heuristic and many many more. When we take these well traveled paths, we undermine the objective good that can be accomplished through slow-process, or conscious, thought. After all, it is through this process people find themselves and can self-actualize; which, is an objective good. Self-actualization is defined by Miriam Webster and dictionary.com as
“the achievement of one's full potential through creativity, independence, spontaneity, and a grasp of the real world.”
Much of what is understood about enculturation and the mind is rooted in what Daniel Kahneman would call fast and slow thinking, or the use of conscious and subconscious thought. According to Kahneman, these processes (mostly the sub) guide our sense of identity and lead the story arcs of our narratives. In our day to day lives, we rarely use the conscious mind to make decisions, but rather, rely on predetermined subconscious standards to come to conclusions. As applied to enculturation, when both of these processes are used it is actually the subconscious that guides our predispositions, with the conscious mind lending its efforts merely toward confirmation/ affirmation bias. This was more or less the case with me in the above-mentioned story.
There are also the issues founded in intention, versus objective good. Whether it’s utilitarianism, communitarianism, libertarian paternalism, or the ideational meandering of Kant or Hobbes, there are objectively higher and lower modes of thought and intention. In these we can determine where I failed to avoid the mental shortcuts we are all prone to. For example, depending on the context, in communitarianism it's the culture that defines good or bad, even if said cultures are oppressive; i.e. the current systems and practices in the sex trafficking industry. Seeing these applied, any girls that later reach womanhood within this organizational culture report feelings of empowerment when they enter management. In management they gain a sense of purpose and ownership over new girls down the ladder. They don’t see the process as exploitative, even when girls are tricked, or kidnapped into the industry. Thus through communitarianism’s lens, it isn’t exploitative. But, as i’m sure you could guess, can only be drawn out so far.
Eventually this argument of enculturation and knowledge leads to the roots of knowing. For instance, how do I know that I am now free from enculturated mental constraints and able to see my missionary past-self at this time objectively. Truth be told, no one will ever be entirely free from enculturation—whether it’s by our flash in the pan snapshot in history, with its ideologies and lenses, or the norms of how we were raised. My conceptions of this time will always be misty, it’s the nature of memory. But, without delving into the nature of being, I can only report that comparatively, from then till now, I have gone through various introspective stages and vettings in order to understand my ontology; the why’s underlying the even more why questions on down through the various layers of conscious and subconscious thoughts and assumptions. No one else can know what I do about myself anymore more than I can know them this intimately. However, there are tells. In general, when one is at peace with themselves, this person is much less likely to project meanings and interpretations onto others, be defensive, or try to convince those around them of what they see. In short, they’re less egocentric and more altruistic and sociocentric/ co-dependant.. But with this said then, is this self-actualization?
In a way, yes.
But no, it’s on the right path, however. Self-actualization is simply achieving one’s potential, and on this front there is a wide spectrum. Also, this methodology revolves back to intentionality and lower and higher ways of thinking yet again. I refer to Michael Sandel’s Justice for further extrapolation on this, but for me, reaching or striving toward objectively "good" ends means mental and social processes leading towards self actualization, love and a shared compassion and altruism towards self and others. I was clearly, according to these values, not on the path leading to these outcomes. I was actively trying to convert those around me. By definition, to convert is to change, and I, attempting to change them. What’s even more interesting, is whether the recent converted couple in the story were acting according to their own objective goods. It is clear I was not. But what then is the ethical outcome if I, taken in blinders, facilitate their conversion? This leads again to the intentionality on the part of both parties, and the ‘good life’ they define for themselves.
Alas, I was helpless to the oppressive thought architecture of my interpretations of mormonism. With no small amount of emotional spillover, I held myself to the ‘highest’ of standards and projected these same requirements on everyone—including myself—in an unacknowledged judgementalism. In research on the topic of women in mormon culture, Kris Doty calls this state ‘toxic perfectionism.’
LDS . . are frequently confronted by the perfect storm of unrealistic expectations, personal guilt and suppressed feelings. In this, it was found that L.D.S. culture encourages a [toxic] perfectionism in it’s members, that then softly discourages the perception there might be problems at home [or with themselves]. In (Mormon) culture, people have just taken it too far. They think they can't make a mistake and so they become hyper-competitive and anxious. If you think you can make no mistake, you're setting yourself up for failure.
In conclusion, there were many instances this toxic perfectionism created a divide between who I was and what I thought I should be to be happy—it was pervasive. These mental and emotional frameworks controlled my identity, my liberty, my narrative and muddied the waters of my true intentions. What was pure and hopeful for my fellowman became ridden with assumed necessities expected from the selfsame humanity. In this, I was a slave to my sovereign of expectation, and projected on others the same master. This, in no way empowered me or those I came into contact with towards our best selves and full potentials. For me, at least, it lead to a systemic forgetfulness. Making it all too easy forget the family, in the human family.
