Question: What are some common ways that critics attempt to dismiss the work of FAIR?

FAIR Answers—back to home page

⍗

Learn more about apologetics and defending the faith

Key sources	Elder Jeffrey R. Holland, “The Maxwell Legacy in the 21st Century,” on pages 8-21 of the “2018 Annual Report” of the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship off-site Youtube Daniel C. Peterson, "The Interpreter Foundation and an Apostolic Charge," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 30/0 (28 December 2018). [vii–xviii] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Elder Neal A. Maxwell on Consecration, Scholarship, and the Defense of the Kingdom," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 7/0 (8 November 2013). [vii–xx] link Michael R. Otterson, "On the Record," Proceedings of the 2015 FAIR Conference (August 2015). link Elder Kevin W. Pearson, "A Sacred and Imperative Duty," Proceedings of the 2018 FAIR Conference (August 2018). link
FAIR links	Apologetics—defending the faith Mentions of FAIR in various media If FAIR is not officially representing the church, why not? FAIR FAQ Wayne Arnett, "Apologetics 101," Proceedings of the 2006 FAIR Conference (August 2006). link Michael Ash, "Shaken Faith Syndrome," Proceedings of the 2008 FAIR Conference (August 2008). link Michael R. Ash, "'Shaken Faith Syndrome, Part Deux'," Proceedings of the 2013 FAIR Conference (August 2013). link Michael Ash and Kevin Barney, "LDS Apologetics 101," Proceedings of the 2003 FAIR Conference (August 2003). link Roger Ekins, "Defending Zion," Proceedings of the 2003 FAIR Conference (August 2003). link Scott Gordon, "Survey Says!," Proceedings of the 2000 FAIR Conference (August 2000). link Grant Hardy, "More Effective Apologetics," Proceedings of the 2016 FAIR Conference (August 2016). link Roger Keller, "The Grace of Apologetics," Proceedings of the 2003 FAIR Conference (August 2003). link John Lynch, "'Uh oh!' to 'Ah ha!' in Apologetics: 20/20 Foresight for a Faithful Future in Defending the Church," Proceedings of the 2009 FAIR Conference (August 2009). link David Paulsen, "'The God of Abraham, Isaac and Joseph Smith: Defending the Faith'," Proceedings of the 2004 FAIR Conference (August 2004). link Daniel Peterson, "'Apologetics: What, Why and How?'," Proceedings of the 2018 FAIR Conference (August 2018). link Daniel C. Peterson, "Humble Apologetics," Proceedings of the 2008 FAIR Conference (August 2008). link Dan Peterson, "Of ‘Mormon Studies’ and Apologetics," Proceedings of the 2012 FAIR Conference (August 2012). link Dan Peterson, "Random Reflections on the Passing Scene," Proceedings of the 2003 FAIR Conference (August 2003). link Dan Peterson, "'The Logic-Tree of Life, or, Why I Can’t Manage to Disbelieve'," Proceedings of the 2016 FAIR Conference (August 2016). link Daniel Peterson, "The Obligation to Do Apologetics," Proceedings of the 2010 FAIR Conference (August 2010). link Dan Peterson, "The Reasonable Leap into Light: A Barebones Secular Argument for the Gospel," Proceedings of the 2015 FAIR Conference (August 2015). link Dan Peterson, "Toward a More Effective Apologetics," Proceedings of the 2013 FAIR Conference (August 2013). link Daniel Peterson, "What Difference Does It Make?," Proceedings of the 2017 FAIR Conference (August 2017). link Ed Pinegar, "How to help young Latter-day Saints deal with criticisms against the Church and the doubts they cause while remaining faithful," Proceedings of the 2015 FAIR Conference (August 2015). link Robert White, "'On Being an Apologist: Imperatives, Predicaments, Perils and Blessings'," Proceedings of the 2009 FAIR Conference (August 2009). link Hartt Wixam, "Perception and Reality: Then and Now," Proceedings of the 2012 FAIR Conference (August 2012). link FAIR FAQ FAIR link Wayne Arnett, "Apologetics 101," FAIR Conference 2006. FAIR link
Online	Gary Bowler, "What is FAIR, and Why Are You Apologizing?" PDF link Gilbert W. Scharffs, "Some people say it is best to leave alone materials that claim to 'expose' the Church and its teachings. What counsel has been given on this? How do we respond when a friend comes to us with questions found in such materials?," Ensign (January 1995), 60 (scroll half-way down).off-site Rick Anderson, "Addressing Prickly Issues," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 23/10 (27 January 2017). [253–262] link Steven T. Densley, Jr., "Should We Apologize for Apologetics?," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 27/7 (20 October 2017). [107–142] link} Terryl L. Givens, "Letter to a Doubter," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 4/6 (5 April 2013). [131–146] link Louis C. Midgley, "Defending the King and His Kingdom," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 2/9 (30 November 2012). [127–144] link Daniel C. Peterson, "An Exhortation to Study God's Two 'Books'," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 13/0 (2 January 2015). [vii–xvi] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Charity in Defending the Kingdom," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 1/0 (28 September 2012). [i–xvi] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Credo," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 57/0 (4 August 2023). [vii–xiv] link Daniel C. Peterson, "How Things Look from Here," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 55/0 (31 March 2023). [vii–xiv] link Daniel C. Peterson, "'In This Batter'd Caravanserai'," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 56/0 (26 May 2023). [vii–xxviii] link} Daniel C. Peterson, "Introduction, Volume 6: The Modest But Important End of Apologetics," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 6/0 (6 September 2013). [vii–xxvi] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Is Faith Compatible with Reason?," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 29/0 (24 August 2018). [vii–xvi] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Making Visible the Beauty and Goodness of the Gospel," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 17/0 (4 December 2015). [vii–xxii] link Daniel C. Peterson, "On Being a Tool," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 19/0 (6 May 2016). [vii–xvi] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Questioning: The Divine Plan," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 15/0 (19 June 2015). [vii–xvi] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Reflections on the Mission of The Interpreter Foundation," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 9/0 (11 April 2014). [vii–xx] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Some Notes on Faith and Reason," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 10/0 (27 June 2014). [vii–xx] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 4/0 (10 May 2013). [vii–xiv] link Daniel C. Peterson, "The Power is In Them," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 26/0 (8 September 2017). [vii–xii] link Daniel C. Peterson, "The Role of Apologetics in Mormon Studies," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 2/0 (14 December 2012). [vii–xlii] link Daniel C. Peterson, "The Word and the Kingdom," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 28/0 (4 May 2018). [vii–xiv] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Three Degrees of Gospel Understanding," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 21/0 (9 September 2016). [vii–xii] link Paul C. Peterson, "To Be Learned Is Good, If One Stays on the Rails," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 30/7 (5 October 2018). [77–90] link [To be Learned Is Good – bad book] Daniel C. Peterson, "Toward Ever More Intelligent Discipleship," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 16/0 (11 September 2015). [vii–xvi] link Stephen O. Smoot, "Shaken Faith Syndrome and the Case for Faith," Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture 2/8 (23 November 2012). [105–126] link Daniel C. Peterson, "Editor's Introduction—The Witchcraft Paradigm: On Claims to 'Second Sight' by People Who Say It Doesn't Exist," FARMS Review 18/2 (2006). [ix–lxiv] link Marianne Holman Prescott, "Be Faithful Disciple-Scholars Even in Difficulty, Elder Holland Says at Maxwell Institute," Church News (13 November 2018), off-site
Video	Elder Jeffrey R. Holland, "The Maxwell Legacy in the 21st Century" (2018 Neal A. Maxwell Lecture), Provo, Utah, 10 November 2018. Youtube
Print	Neal A. Maxwell, “The Disciple-Scholar,” in Henry B. Eyring, ed., On Becoming a Disciple-Scholar: Lectures Presented at the Brigham Young University Honors Program Discipline and Discipleship Lecture Series (Salt Lake City, Bookcraft: 1995), 1–23.
Navigators	Table of contents Abuse Book of Mormon CES Letter Church history Church finances Doctrine and Covenants First Vision Joseph Smith Latter-day Saint temples Mountain Meadows Massacre Plural marriage Plural marriage essays

Question: What are some common ways that critics attempt to dismiss the work of FAIR?

Critics often seek to dismiss the work of FAIR and tell their audience that there are no good answers to their questions. It is probably much easier to encourage their audience to ignore us, rather than engage with what we present.

Claim: 'Truth needs no defense'; 'Just seeing the table of contents for FAIR will show you how many problems the Church has'.

Some people assume that the amount of work that has gone into Latter-day Saint apologetics through FAIR suggests that there are a lot of issues that the Church has to deal with. Others have claimed that Truth needs no defense. It will fight for itself. This is clearly false, for a number of reasons:

• Some people are ignorant of the truth
• Some people are aware of the truth, but don’t have the expertise to appreciate all its nuances.
• Some critics misrepresent the truth
• Some critics understand the truth but purposefully lie in order to win influence.
• Knowledge is always increasing; what might have seemed like a good criticism in the past may now be shown to be incorrect because of new information.

If you were accused of a serious crime, would you listen to a lawyer who told you that "truth needs no defense"? In court, we understand that the truth especially needs a defense, since people can misunderstand or misrepresent evidence.

Claim: FAIR doesn’t acknowledge the issue fully; FAIR has created a lot of answers out of confirmation bias and isn’t reliable; FAIR is dishonest and doesn’t include both sides of an argument fairly

Some have claimed that FAIR is not fully honest. Some claim that FAIR

• does not acknowledge the complexity of a problem
• produces answers that are subject to confirmation bias
• is dishonest about whether an issue has a good answer.

In response, we would suggest the reader consider these points:

1. FAIR provides its reader with the actual criticisms (usually with direct citation from critics) and our answers. We have worked with hundreds of people with questions, and so are usually well-acquainted with the issues at stake. If we have omitted an area of concern to you, please let us know.
2. Like everyone, FAIR authors have biases. By putting our work on an apologetic website, we are making our biases clear. Readers can account for those biases. Critics often portray themselves as just helpful, disinterested seekers of truth. Readers troubled by something from a critic should likewise consider the critics’ biases—and ask whether they received all the information provided by FAIR from the critic.
3. FAIR strives for accuracy, truthfulness, and transparency. If readers encounter a statement or citation that is false or mistaken, we appreciate having it drawn to our attention. FAIR has many authors and volunteers, and we do make mistakes. These mistakes are unintentional.
4. Readers should remember that it is not in FAIR’s interest to be dishonest. We know that our material will be scrutinized heavily. Critics are often gleeful when they find an error (but this provides us with valuable peer review!) We also know that if we are dishonest in one article, that will reduce readers’ trust.
5. Even when mistakes are found, this does not mean that the author was dishonest: an accusation of dishonesty presumes intent to deceive and knowledge that one was deceiving.

Claim: FAIR's responses are full of logical fallacies and especially ad hominem attacks

In an attempt to dismiss FAIR’s work, critics will often claim that we commit logical fallacies, especially ad hominem attacks. An accusation of a fallacy is, in itself, a fallacy unless the critic can provide examples. This they rarely, if ever, attempt. Readers should ask themselves if claims of fallacy are more of an effort to discredit us before our arguments have been heard.

Ad hominem means to the man—it is a type of bad reasoning in which the person making the argument is attacked, rather than the argument itself.

FAIR does not attack individuals, or encourage readers to dismiss their arguments unheard. We have often told critics making this claim that if they can point to any examples, we will correct the problem. No one has done so yet, so if you spot one, let us know! Ad hominem attacks encourage the audience to ignore someone’s argument by painting the person making the argument in a bad light. Readers should realize that accusing someone of ad hominem without providing specific evidence is ‘’itself’’ a form of ad hominem.

Many critics who are quick to blame FAIR for this have egregious examples of their own.

Claim: FAIR simply tries to cloud the issues

FAIR aims to provide context and further information—only someone with significant bias would claim that these are of no importance. Readers will have to decide for themselves whether the information we provide is helpful. (If you realized that claiming someone just clouds the issues without providing specific examples and counterarguments, congratulations—you’ve spotting another example of the ad hominem fallacy!)

Claim: FAIR gaslights its readers

The act of gaslighting is to manipulate someone through psychological means so that they question reality. It is not gaslighting to argue that there is another way of seeing matters in light of different evidence or presuppositions.

Claim: FAIR uses biased scholarship to substantiate their views. Unbiased scholars don't accept the Book of Mormon nor Book of Abraham as factual or historical. Unbiased historians acknowledge Joseph Smith's history as deeply problematic. You can't trust any of FAIR's apologetic scholarship

As noted above, everyone has biases. This is why we must explore the evidence that people offer, and not just claim that they "have biases". (Every critic of the Church has their own biases—often very deep-seated ones. But, they don’t tell us that we should ignore them because of their biases. Bias does not mean that one cannot do good scholarly or scientific or historical work—if it did, there would be no such work done at all.

Many of the authors cited by FAIR have significant academic credentials. For instance, Dr. John Gee has his PhD in Egyptology from Yale. For example, Dr. John Gee wrote:

According to Oxford University’s and the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München’s Online Egyptological Bibliography, I am already in the top 4 percent of Egyptologists historically in terms of number of Egyptological publications.[. . .] In 2018 I served as a member of the Board of Trustees for the Society for the Study of Egyptian Antiquities.

This does not mean that Gee should be accepted uncritically—but it is also not fair to claim that because he has a bias, he cannot have something worthwhile to say. The only way to know is to read him—and if you’ve been following along, you’ll know that critics seem desperate to get you to not read what we have to offer. Why might that be?

Notes