About/FAQ

Standards of Truth is a guide to improving critical thinking and finding reliable ways to identify true prophets.

It includes the world’s largest list of problematic statements by prophets of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (CoJCoLdS, LDS Church, Mormonism, Mormon Church).

This book challenges readers to think deeply about questions such as:

• Why is it important to identify true prophets?

• How can one best identify true prophets?

• How can we avoid cognitive biases and poor reasoning while identifying true prophets?

• How can the "ultimate epistemic question" promote more thoughtful and respectful discussions around religious topics?

Who is this book for?

• Members of the CoJCoLdS and those curious about its teachings.

• People interested in how critical thinking and epistemology apply to religious beliefs.

• Readers seeking deeper insights into how to identify truth and navigate challenging questions of faith.

How to Read Standards of Truth

• Read Online: Click here to start at the intro or go to the main page and scroll down to click on any of the chapter titles or images.

• Download the PDF: Prefer offline reading? Download the full book for free.  Click here for instructions if needed.

• List of Quotes: For the world's largest list of challenging quotes by LDS prophets, click here.

For those who already feel confident in their understanding of how to identify true prophets, this book may still offer value. 

It serves as an opportunity to reflect on the epistemic methods you already use, identify potential areas of refinement, and explore how to help others grapple with these critical questions. 

Even if you already know what works for you, understanding why it works can make you more effective in conversations with those who think differently.

To read the list, click on "Example Evaluation (List of Quotes)"

A natural byproduct of Standards of Truth was (to my knowledge) the world’s largest citation-supported list of problematic quotes by prophets of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (CoJCoLdS, LDS Church, Mormonism, Mormon Church), with 153 false statements, 147 contradictory statements, and 365 unethical statements, making a total of 665 unique statements (more detailed breakdown available in the results table).

Certain omissions were made to maintain scope and academic integrity:

• Statements by CoJCoLdS leaders prior to their ordination as prophets, seers, and revelators

• Statements by other high leaders of the CoJCoLdS who were not formally ordained as prophets, seers, and revelators (e.g., Presidency of the Seventy, Presiding Bishopric, General Auxiliary Presidents, etc.) 

• Statements that may have been said, but cannot be reasonably attributed to the speaker via linked citation

I strongly believe that awareness of these statements can benefit everyone, regardless of their relationship with the CoJCoLdS. For example, active members may gain a deeper appreciation of prophetic humanity, increasing their ability to thoughtfully reflect on contemporary counsel.

As enlightening as the compilation of quotes may be, I highly recommend beginning from the intro to Standards of Truth (a very short read), which will start you on an introspective journey to avoid cognitive biases and craft your own reliable standards for identifying true prophets.  Standards of Truth aims to equip readers with powerful tools for critical thinking, enabling them not only to navigate one of religion’s most profound questions, but also to learn the "ultimate epistemic question" and become a voice of reason in a world inundated with truth claims.

I recommend the summary section of Cognitive Biases and Poor Epistemic Standards. 

After that, maybe try Outro: The Ultimate Epistemic Question.

Although the confirmation algorithm was used in this example to support a prophetic claim, it can be similarly used to justify any claim (e.g., flat earth, conspiracy theories, scams).  

The problem with the confirmation algorithm is that all possible observations are interpreted in a way that reinforces the claim—even observations that would normally weaken or falsify the claim. Thus, the claim cannot be weakened or falsified, and one’s ability to distinguish false from true claims is greatly diminished. 

For examples of the confirmation algorithm being the worst, see the sections on the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Seekers, and the Movement of the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God.

Of all the possible takeaways in Standards of Truth, I suggest the most important is the value of asking the “ultimate epistemic question” when faced with consequential or extraordinary truth claims:

“What would be the best way to tell if that were true?”

By consistently asking this high-yield question, we can confront our biases, refine our epistemic methods, strive for more justified beliefs, and become a voice of reason in the face of extraordinary or important truth claims. 

Read more in Outro: The Ultimate Epistemic Question.

I didn't bring it in—it was already there! (see examples of epistemic standards from CoJCoLdS teachings)

Epistemology—the study of ways to seek truth—goes hand in hand with religion—especially the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Many people value religious truth. For centuries, people have discussed the best ways to find out whether gods exist and the best ways of discovering the nature and will of such gods. The concepts of a "true church" and "true prophets" are also important for many.

This is especially the case in the CoJCoLdS, where monthly Fast and Testimony Meetings are replete with phrases about truth. For example:

• “I know this Church is true.”

• “I know Joseph Smith was a true prophet.”

• “I know the Book of Mormon is true.”

• “I know Jesus Christ lives.”

The more important the truth claims on the line, the more important epistemology becomes. That is why skills in epistemology are essential for evaluating religious truth claims, especially in truth centric religions like the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Falsifiability is the ability of a statement to be found false. According to this principle, any worthy claim should remain open to the possibility of being challenged by new information. One can learn whether a statement is falsifiable by asking, "Would it be possible to find out if this were false?"

CoJCoLdS scholar and apologist Hugh Nibley criticized the use of unfalsifiable claims for finding truth:

 "The rational foundation for [unjustified] claims to divine right are as easily established as the historical. The classical formula is given by Anselm: fides quaerens intellectum; you first decide what you are going to believe and then you set out to find intellectual demonstrations that will support it. And such proof comes easily and mechanically to hand if one has been 'steeled in the school of old Aquinas,' who gives us the useful rule: 'Since the faith rests on infallible truth, it would be impossible to bring forth a valid demonstration against it; for it is obvious that any arguments brought forth against the faith are not really proofs but soluble arguments.' Thus I might state as a true principle that any coin when tossed will always come down heads. I toss the coin, and it comes down tails, but according to St. Thomas' convenient rule, that toss does not count—it must be ruled out since it refutes a true principle; and so by disqualifying all unfavorable tosses I can exhaustively demonstrate my doctrine that any coin when tossed will always come down heads. With an arsenal of such useful weapons at their disposal, it is not surprising that the schoolmen can come up with any proofs they want in matters of authority or anything else. There is no more powerful argumentrix, Tertullian reminds us, than self-interest."

For more on unfalsifiable standards and other epistemic pitfalls, see Cognitive Biases and Poor Epistemic Standards

Yes, there is an overlap between these concepts! For example, emotional reasoning could be considered both a logical fallacy (a flaw in logic that leads to an unsupported conclusion) and a poor epistemic standard (an unreliable method for seeking truth). 

On the other hand, unfalsifiable standards and the confirmation algorithm didn't seem to fall neatly into the category of logical fallacies.

Here's a list of logical fallacies: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ 

My upbringing in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (CoJCoLdS) was replete with spiritual experiences. I spent countless hours in study and prayer, seeking to follow the promptings of the Spirit. By the end of high school, I had given away around 30 copies of the Book of Mormon, promising my friends that if they read it and prayed about it, they'd come to know as I had that Joseph Smith was a true prophet.

After a two-year full-time proselyting mission, I began studying neuroscience at Brigham Young University. There, I learned how efficiently our minds process information—and how these processes sometimes result in cognitive biases (i.e., mental shortcuts that can undermine rational judgment). I also studied logical fallacies and poor epistemic standards, (e.g., straw man arguments, emotional reasoning, and double standards). 

This knowledge felt liberating and exciting. I began wondering to what extent cognitive biases and flawed reasoning had influenced the formation of my own beliefs. This sparked a journey of critical self-examination. I worked to hold fast to what was good and true while discarding what might have been the "traditions of [my] fathers, which [were] not correct." (Mosiah 1:5)

In a search for further insight, I noticed a gap in the CoJCoLdS literature addressing epistemology and cognitive biases—tools that are foundational for understanding how we form and evaluate religious beliefs.  There was a lack of church-approved resources, and materials written by outsiders were often perceived as off-putting or even threatening to the beliefs of members. To address this need, I created Standards of Truth—a resource designed to promote thoughtful reflection and respectful discourse around these important topics. I spent hundreds of hours researching, consulting feedback from members across the belief spectrum, and refining the content to increase accessibility, utility, and impartiality.

Thank you for engaging with this work. I strongly believe that anyone—regardless of their relationship with the CoJCoLdS—can benefit from understanding and applying these ideas. Standards of Truth is a work in progress, so please share your perspective on how to improve it—I am eager to learn from others. I hope this work has offered even a small measure of insight or encouragement in your journey toward truth.  

Any Device

If you are looking for a particular quote, phrase, or topic, there should be a magnifying glass in the top right of the screen. Click on it and type in a word or short phrase to search.

(This function searches the whole book, but only brings up a limited number of results. For a more thorough search on a single page, see the options below.)

PC or Mac

Simultaneously pressing the "Ctrl" and "F" keys on PC (or the "Cmd" and "F" keys on Macs) should bring up a search bar. Type in a word or short phrase to search.

(This function searches only the current page, and does not search within collapsed headings. If you expand the headings, the search will apply to the text under them as well.)

Android phones

There should be 3 vertical dots in the top right of the screen. Click on them, then click on "Find in page." This should bring up a search bar. Type in a word or short phrase to search.

iPhones

Type a word or short phrase into the navigation bar at the top of the screen. Scroll down to "On this page" and click on it. This should bring up a search bar on the bottom of the screen.

PDF

To read and search Standards of Truth offline, click on "Download PDF." Open the file in a PDF viewer (e.g., Adobe Acrobat, Google Chrome, Edge), any of which should have a built-in search function.