Simplicity vs. Complexity

[JudoMinja]

This topic came up in another thread, and it piqued my interest-

Is the gospel simple or complex?

To sum up what brought me to the creation of this thread- One individual made the argument that the gospel is and has to be simple, because everyone needs to be able to understand it. We have a tendancy to over-think things and make something complicated that just isn't, and the gospel is really very simple.

Others countered that the gospel is complex- that it is not given to all to "understand" but that we are expected to be faithful and expand on what we have been given. Some will have to simply believe and rely on the knowledge or testimony of others, while some are gifted with exceptional academic or intellectual ability and that these may come to understand many of the complexities of the gospel through rigorous study.

Now my interest was sparked because I can see some merit in both directions and believe that the gospel is actually both simple and complex. My initial thoughts on the matter centered around mathematics- now when we consider the ease with which one can understand basic mathematic principles like addition and subtraction, as well as the fact that there is always "one" correct answer we can see that math is simple. However, anyone who has studied higher mathematics like calculus, trigonometry, or statistics will likely tell you that it is very complex. Yet even with these challenging problems, I can distinctly remember working on calculus equations that I would "over-think" and would always be surprised by the simplicity of the solution.

My thoughts were then led to my environmental and ecological studies- that the planet itself is both a simple and complex system. There are so many intricate details and complex relationships between living organisms, so heavily reliant on one another and delicately balanced. Yet the laws that govern these systems all boil down to simple cycles. Even a seed is both simple and complex- it's genetic code studied extensively by scientists and carrying within it the key to unlocking the growth of a unique plant. The specific conditions necessary for the greatest success are very individualized and complex, yet at the same time it is something simple...

When we look at how Christ taught with parables we see yet another combination of both simplicity and complexity. There are lessons that can be learned from these parables on the basest most simple level, yet as our learning and understanding expands we can see an increasing complexity to the parables with an even greater number of lessons hidden within. We are told to read and study our scriptures daily, even though this means we will end up reading the same words over and over again, why? Because we can always find ourselves learning something new from a passage depending on the knowledge and experience we have gained. We can always apply the scriptures to our lives no matter what point in our lives we may find ourselves in.

And of course there is Occam's razor- "The simplest answer is most often correct" - which is used in analyzing scientific theories, relationships and social matters, crimes, and conspiracies. No matter how complex and interwoven something gets, it always seems to come back to something simple.

I think that much of the gospel is complex because there is so much of it, it covers so many things, it is an interwoven tapestry or orchestral symphony made up of many many parts that come together in a perfect and beautiful whole. When looked at in indivudal pieces, those pieces are made easier to understand but can provide mixed messages when trying to join them together and understand the whole- like the blind men touching the elephant. Yet when it does all come together, the answer is wonderfully simplistic.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Thanks for your post. This is an interesting topic. I think one context to keep in mind is the purpose of this life. I think people somehow think that the goal of this life is to learn about the gospel as if it has never been learned before, to discover it. If we have a testimony that we lived before this life, we matured as spirits and lived in the presence of our Heavenly Father and we were presented a plan in which we knew we were going to be placed behind a veil and tested as to our character and our deepest nature and we accepted that plan. Then, we all knew that coming here was not to test how much knowledge we could gather, it is a test of what we do with what we are given. This is an opportunity to gain experiential knowledge about the power of faith in Christ. It is not an opportunity to relearn everything we already learned and agreed to in the premortal life. We all passed our first estate, meaning we all understood the complexities of the gospel well enough to make an informed decision about its merits and we agreed to it. This life is not a test to see if we ideologically agree with the plan or not, we already agreed with it. It is a test to see if we do what we agreed to do based in faith alone.

Everyone is given a different set of circumstances but for specific reasons. It is up to that person to try to understand their stewardships. To some it may be their lot to have to understand the gospel better than most, because they are called as teachers and bearers of the word. To others their lot is more service oriented, etc. But it is not everyone's lot to understand the gospel 100%, I would say most of us are supposed to live it by faith.

[Guest gopecon]

The Gospel of Jesus Christ is simple - have faith in Jesus, repent, and take upon His name and enter His church through the ordinances of baptism and confirmation by one holding the proper authority.

Eternity is complex, with much that we don't have revealed to us. The commandments can be complex, with all of the what if's we can use when exploring gray areas. Even here, if we were to think about the two great commandments - love God and love your neighbor - the rest of the details often fall into place.

[RMGuy]

The simple Gospel of Jesus Christ is as complex as our bureaucracy can make it.

-RM

[Traveler]

Things which we have somewhat mastered and understand to us seem simple. Things that we do not understand (regardless of their simplicity) are complex to us.

What gets really complicated is the process of admitting to ourselves that we do not understand something that should be or is simple.

The Traveler

[annewandering]

You guys are so much better at saying what I was trying to say and adding in ideas I hadnt thought of.

I would like to add a thought to the math analogy. When we actually got to, was it Uranus, with a probe we discovered half of what we were sure we knew was wrong, or so at least one of the major scientists said. I think we can apply this to the gospel as well. When we get away from the basics we go into areas that we may think we know, or can figure out, but do we really, and is it important that we do?

[Obolus]

The truth is that everything, no matter how simple, has infinite complexity.

Take the island of Hawaii. If you were to measure its perimeter with a yard stick that were a mile long, you'd come up with a figure. But if you were to measure them with a yard stick that were instead an actual yard you'd come up with a much larger figure because that yard stick would be able to measure details in the perimeter that the mile stick couldn't get to. The measurement for a foot, and inch, and a tenth of an inch would all be increasingly larger, and honesty would eventually lead you to determine that the perimeter of Hawaii is actually infinite.

Even if you are just talking about clipping your fingernails, there is no real end to the detail and complexity of this simple act. You can discuss it scientifically, historically, anthropologically, metaphysically, you can discuss its mythology and sociology, you can write 5000 stories about how clipped or unclipped fingernails affected people's relationships, church basketball games, and guitar lessons.

The gospel can of course be understood in the most basic terms and ordinances. But to dismiss or ignore its complexity and depth of symbolism is to necessarily plateau in your growth in knowledge. The Lord has declared that his glory is intelligence and that those who advance in knowledge in this life will have the advantage in the world to come.

It's not just a statement of fact. It's an invitation to advance.

[skippy740]

The Articles of Faith and the 10 Commandments are rather simple...

Understanding and following the gospel are two different things.

[rameumptom]

It is both simple and complex. The Gospel contains all truths, including the truths that guide how the planets and stars form and revolve, as well as how quarks gather to form atoms, etc. In this, there is complexity, and beauty in that complexity.

But there is also simplicity in it. Our DNA is rather complex, but very similar to every other life form on earth.

The gospel is simple in that it is in many ways black and white. Yet, God also deals in shades of gray, which increases complexity. Does God deal with all sinners exactly the same for every sin from big and small? It would be very simple if he did. Are three heavens more complex than one heaven?

So, I would say that it is simple. Yet, because mankind is so complex, God allows complexity into the equation in order to deal with each difference and shade of gray that occurs. However, he refrains from over-complicating things.

[Guest mormonmusic]

The gospel is simple if you are not someone who thinks deeply. For some, this is the best route, like children and teenagers who simply need a scaffold for their life experiences, and don't question the rest of it.

For others who think deeply, it is amazingly complex. For me, it's gotten even more complex as I've hit certain faith and commitment crises where the things I hear at Church don't add up to my life experiences. Then I started reading books that are supposed to give a fair, outsider's look at Mormonism (Like Mormon America). As a resultthe questions have grown even more substantial. Now, the gospel seems incredibly complex with many paradoxes that need reconciliation, many questions about the motives behind certain policies etcetera.

For me, the gospel is very complex at this point in my life.

So, the deeper you question and study, the more complex it becomes -- particularly if you go outside the rose-colored publications which only shine light on the faith-promoting aspects of our religion

[Dravin]

The gospel is simple if you are not someone who thinks deeply. For some, this is the best route, like children and teenagers who simply need a scaffold for their life experiences, and don't question the rest of it.

For others who think deeply, it is amazingly complex.

It's kinda like math. A little algebra is as far as you need to learn to get along (in American society), but if one wants to dig deep into the math there is a whole lot more there.

[annewandering]

The gospel is simple if you are not someone who thinks deeply. For some, this is the best route, like children and teenagers who simply need a scaffold for their life experiences, and don't question the rest of it.

For others who think deeply, it is amazingly complex. For me, it's gotten even more complex as I've hit certain faith and commitment crises where the things I hear at Church don't add up to my life experiences. Then I started reading books that are supposed to give a fair, outsider's look at Mormonism (Like Mormon America). As a resultthe questions have grown even more substantial. Now, the gospel seems incredibly complex with many paradoxes that need reconciliation, many questions about the motives behind certain policies etcetera.

For me, the gospel is very complex at this point in my life.

So, the deeper you question and study, the more complex it becomes -- particularly if you go outside the rose-colored publications which only shine light on the faith-promoting aspects of our religion

I am curious what you mean by someone who does not think deeply. Someone incapable? To me the simplicity of the gospel is sheer elegance. Complicating it may be fun, even interesting but it is the sheer simplicity that is the heart of it's beauty. How can something so important, even our salvation be built on something only 'deep thinkers' can truly appreciate?

I am amazed how our Father in Heaven made it pure and simple. Now that took real deep thinking.

[Madriglace]

"If you love me , keep my commandments" ... how much more simple can it get????? The gospel is beautiful in it's simplicity ... we make it hard. The Savior taught in a way that everyone could understand ... those that didn't refused to see. Many people like to question down to the smallest ion and that is fine for them ... for me it doesn't get me any closer to my celestial goal so why give myself a head ache? It is not that I am not a deep thinker but that I choose to channel my energy to where it is most profitable for me.

[Dravin]

I am curious what you mean by someone who does not think deeply.

I think he means this:

Thought 1:

I turn the key in the ignition of my car and it starts.

Thought 2:

When I turn the key to my car it sends a signal to the ECU which then sends a signal to the starter motor. Additional signals are sent to the fuel and air pumps which send fuel and air into the combustion chambers. Current from the battery flows into spark plugs which cause electricity to spark across a gap in the aforementioned fuel and air which causes combustion. The combustion creates hot gas which expands in the combustion chamber, which being constrained, increases in pressure such that the piston is pushed down.

I'm sure a mechanic could provide a more detailed/deeper (and probably more correct) explanation of the processes.

Some people like to turn the key and go, others like to understand what is going on under the hood. I think which gives you more satisfaction (or less headache) is highly dependent on the person and I don't think one is inherently better than the other. MormonMusic's preference is showing through with a bias towards deep being superior, I'm not sure if that was intentional or just some unfortunate phrasing.

Edited October 24, 2011 by Dravin

[annewandering]

MormonMusic's preference is showing through with a bias towards deep being superior, I'm not sure if that was intentional or just some unfortunate phrasing.

I hope you are right because I admit it was annoying.

[Dravin]

I hope you are right because I admit it was annoying.

Understandable, his post can be parsed as implying those who work with the gospel on the simple® level think like children and teens, which most adults are going to take reflexive umbrage at.

[annewandering]

Understandable, his post can be parsed as implying those who work with the gospel on the simple® level think like children and teens, which most adults are going to take reflexive umbrage at.

I am really good at reflexive umbrage. ^^ It is one of my great talents in life. :)

[Traveler]

Truth is simple thus the Gospel is simple. We may try to make truth and the gospel complex by various orders and exceptions - all of which are illusions. The only complexity is those things we do not understand.

Mathematical theory is very simplistic. In essence all math is contained within the understanding of the binary operation of addition. Everything else in math comes from applications (short cuts) of addition. Likewise all gospel principles can be understood within the simple concept of covenant and discipline.

Likewise good and evil. Good is directly dependent on discipline and sacrifice. Evil is the opposite and is dependent on indulgence and selfishness.

It is my opinion that truth, enlightenment, righteousness and knowledge are all simple principles - it is the lies, evil and deceptions that create complexity.

The Traveler

[Guest mormonmusic]

I am curious what you mean by someone who does not think deeply. Someone incapable?

No, not someone who isnt' capable someone who is not predisposed to it. Some people think very deeply about things, looking for alignment with the various parts, for consistency, for resolutions to conflicting behavior when you compare values to behavior, etcetera. Others are content to accept the thing they hear at Church without question, and then go on their way. I'm not saying one is better than the other -- they are simply different.

Judominja's initial question -- is it complicated, or simple is a case in point. Someone who thinks it's simple and doesnt' think much would simply not ask this question. Peole who think deeply will ask these questions.

[JudoMinja]

I think he means this:

Thought 1:

I turn the key in the ignition of my car and it starts.

Thought 2:

When I turn the key to my car it sends a signal to the ECU which then sends a signal to the starter motor. Additional signals are sent to the fuel and air pumps which send fuel and air into the combustion chambers. Current from the battery flows into spark plugs which cause electricity to spark across a gap in the aforementioned fuel and air which causes combustion. The combustion creates hot gas which expands in the combustion chamber, which being constrained, increases in pressure such that the piston is pushed down.

I'm sure a mechanic could provide a more detailed/deeper (and probably more correct) explanation of the processes.

Some people like to turn the key and go, others like to understand what is going on under the hood. I think which gives you more satisfaction (or less headache) is highly dependent on the person and I don't think one is inherently better than the other. MormonMusic's preference is showing through with a bias towards deep being superior, I'm not sure if that was intentional or just some unfortunate phrasing.

I like this analogy as it emphasizes a difference too in "doers" and "thinkers". Some people are geared to act, and some are geared to think. If you have too much in either direction, you end up with problems. Those who always do without thinking will eventually end up stumbling over something that they should have thought through before acting. And those who always think without doing will end up stewing forever and missing their opportunities. While everyone has a natural tendancy toward one or the other there needs to be a good balance between the two.

For instance- if I always just "turn the key and go" without putting any thought whatsoever into how it works, the car will eventually "die" and I won't know what to do. But if I feel like I have to understand every minute detail about how the car works before I will drive it, I'll never get anywhere. The gospel works the same way. The knowledge required for us to "act" on the gospel is very minimal and simple. But if we always just "turn the key and go" eventually we'll hit some kind of speedbump that challenges our testimony. Also, if we get stuck in a rut of study before we will act on our faith, we will lose our testimony completely. It requires BOTH thinking and do-ing.

However, not everyone has to be a "deep" thinker, just like not everyone needs to be a mechanic. Not thinking about something deeply doesn't make someone less of a person or inferior to those who prefer to think deeply, and we all have specific topics of interest that we will put more thought into while others the basics suffice. What I find most interesting about "deep" thinking though is that those topics I have taken the time to learn more about and examine on a deeper level have always turned back to "simple" answers.

For instance- because I've gone to college for an environmental degree just about all my classes touched on the topic of "global warming" or climate change. I've examined the ins and outs so much I could probably call myself an expert on it even though the more I learn about it the more I find that there is still more I don't know. That's the complexity. However, I've also found that it all boils down to something "simple". The amount of matter on the earth is relatively constant, and as we utilize the earth's resources we "waste" quite a bit of that matter into the atmosphere- turning solid into gas. Those resources are not gone, they are just in the air, making the atmosphere thicker and increasing the amount of heat we "retain" from the sun. It's one of those simple cycles that we all learn about in grade school, and the "solutions" people are coming up with typically involve slowing our rate of "waste" or finding ways to captue and use the resources we've put in the atmosphere- slowing and/or completeing the cycle. That's the simplicity.

I've seen this in just about every topic I've deigned to study deeply. No matter how complex it gets, no matter how tangled, no matter how much there still is I don't know, it always boils down to something simple. I think that studying the complexity helps me appreciate the simplicity more and helps me understand better ways to apply my knowledge of the complexity- but in many ways it also leaves me finding that I didn't really NEED to understand all those little details either, because the simple answers were always right there in front of me.

The more I think about it, the more I see that everything works this way, and that many "discoveries" came about when people searched and studied and worked out the complex details only to come to a simple answer. The First Vision is a perfect example of this pertaining to the gospel- Joseph Smith searched and studied.. He went to many denominations trying to find the truth. He tried to "work out" the details studying the Bible and came across a "simple" solution- James 1:5. He asked God.

[annewandering]

I like this analogy as it emphasizes a difference too in "doers" and "thinkers". Some people are geared to act, and some are geared to think. If you have too much in either direction, you end up with problems. Those who always do without thinking will eventually end up stumbling over something that they should have thought through before acting. And those who always think without doing will end up stewing forever and missing their opportunities. While everyone has a natural tendancy toward one or the other there needs to be a good balance between the two.

For instance- if I always just "turn the key and go" without putting any thought whatsoever into how it works, the car will eventually "die" and I won't know what to do. But if I feel like I have to understand every minute detail about how the car works before I will drive it, I'll never get anywhere. The gospel works the same way. The knowledge required for us to "act" on the gospel is very minimal and simple. But if we always just "turn the key and go" eventually we'll hit some kind of speedbump that challenges our testimony. Also, if we get stuck in a rut of study before we will act on our faith, we will lose our testimony completely. It requires BOTH thinking and do-ing.

However, not everyone has to be a "deep" thinker, just like not everyone needs to be a mechanic. Not thinking about something deeply doesn't make someone less of a person or inferior to those who prefer to think deeply, and we all have specific topics of interest that we will put more thought into while others the basics suffice. What I find most interesting about "deep" thinking though is that those topics I have taken the time to learn more about and examine on a deeper level have always turned back to "simple" answers.

For instance- because I've gone to college for an environmental degree just about all my classes touched on the topic of "global warming" or climate change. I've examined the ins and outs so much I could probably call myself an expert on it even though the more I learn about it the more I find that there is still more I don't know. That's the complexity. However, I've also found that it all boils down to something "simple". The amount of matter on the earth is relatively constant, and as we utilize the earth's resources we "waste" quite a bit of that matter into the atmosphere- turning solid into gas. Those resources are not gone, they are just in the air, making the atmosphere thicker and increasing the amount of heat we "retain" from the sun. It's one of those simple cycles that we all learn about in grade school, and the "solutions" people are coming up with typically involve slowing our rate of "waste" or finding ways to captue and use the resources we've put in the atmosphere- slowing and/or completeing the cycle. That's the simplicity.

I've seen this in just about every topic I've deigned to study deeply. No matter how complex it gets, no matter how tangled, no matter how much there still is I don't know, it always boils down to something simple. I think that studying the complexity helps me appreciate the simplicity more and helps me understand better ways to apply my knowledge of the complexity- but in many ways it also leaves me finding that I didn't really NEED to understand all those little details either, because the simple answers were always right there in front of me.

The more I think about it, the more I see that everything works this way, and that many "discoveries" came about when people searched and studied and worked out the complex details only to come to a simple answer. The First Vision is a perfect example of this pertaining to the gospel- Joseph Smith searched and studied.. He went to many denominations trying to find the truth. He tried to "work out" the details studying the Bible and came across a "simple" solution- James 1:5. He asked God.

For me the talent is boiling it down to the basic. Not sure if that is deep thinking or not but I have found the same thing you are talking about. Most things boil down to simple. I was thinking about Einstein the other day in regards to this. He had a thought when he was 20, if I remember right, about how E=MCsquared. Now he did not have the math worked out and he didnt have the actual formula. He spent a lot of time and effort proving the theory but in the end it came down to a very short simple equation.

Maybe life is like that. Maybe the gospel is like that.

[Guest Magen_Avot]

I am reminded of the "meat" and "milk" mentioned in the new testament but that may very well be a new thread. But this example reminds us that we should not give meat to the more infant in the gospel so as not to choke them, yet the Savior seems to work the same way as annewandering. He takes the 10 commandments and parses them into the two great commandments and asks us to become like little children who,... drink milk rather than eat meat. At the same time we are asked to seek the mysteries of the kingdom which is perhaps more complex (because it is meat and beyond our comprehension) yet when discovered is simple. I guess I'm saying that it is also a matter of our perspective or where we are at.

My example is education since I mentioned seeking the mysteries of the kingdom.

I had worked to the ripe young age of 46 then went to college. I had previously resented every-single-person who claimed a college degree because I had life experience worthy of a degree in radar mechanics and theory. By my junior year I became aware that I had no need of resentment,... I had merely rose to an upper floor in the same 'building' giving me a different view of my surroundings. I had a grander view, better understanding and could see further. Yet it was a simple view. "Where" I was had changed but there is more to know that is complex to my understanding. That is the process of eternity as I see it through my simple perpective.

Edited October 25, 2011 by Magen_Avot

[Traveler]

What I find most intriguing in this discussion is a complete lack of discussion specific to any gospel principal that is complex beyond question and lacking simplistic underpinnings. The best example of complex thinking I have encountered in religious discussions is the doctrine of the Trinity. The reason I find this doctrine so complex is because every principle of the doctrine at some point contradicts itself. What I find frustrating about discussions with proponents of the complexity of the doctrine; is that in pointing out the contradictions I am faced with one of 3 responses.

1. That divine things are mysterious and cannot be understood by man. (A statement I find contradictory to truth in general)

2. That some things must be accepted on faith. In my experience this kind of faith is more associated with deception than is truth.

3. G-d is all powerful and can do and be whatever he wants whenever he wants - even if it is a contradiction. This is a rather intriguing though and though a very good argument hardly describes any enlightened (good) being I have encountered but rather tends to describe the kind of “undisciplined” being I have learned by experience to associate with evil.

However, I must admit that the soul reason this doctrine remains complex to me is that try as I may - I cannot make simple sense of it. Without question - I have missed something in the doctrine.

The Traveler

[JudoMinja]

What I find most intriguing in this discussion is a complete lack of discussion specific to any gospel principal that is complex beyond question and lacking simplistic underpinnings. The best example of complex thinking I have encountered in religious discussions is the doctrine of the Trinity. The reason I find this doctrine so complex is because every principle of the doctrine at some point contradicts itself. What I find frustrating about discussions with proponents of the complexity of the doctrine; is that in pointing out the contradictions I am faced with one of 3 responses.

1. That divine things are mysterious and cannot be understood by man. (A statement I find contradictory to truth in general)

2. That some things must be accepted on faith. In my experience this kind of faith is more associated with deception than is truth.

3. G-d is all powerful and can do and be whatever he wants whenever he wants - even if it is a contradiction. This is a rather intriguing though and though a very good argument hardly describes any enlightened (good) being I have encountered but rather tends to describe the kind of “undisciplined” being I have learned by experience to associate with evil.

However, I must admit that the soul reason this doctrine remains complex to me is that try as I may - I cannot make simple sense of it. Without question - I have missed something in the doctrine.

The Traveler

Well from my LDS perspective, I would say that the reason the Trinity doctrine does not boil down to something simple is because it is "incomplete". The "simple" answer that explains this doctrine would be the First Vision- That God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are literally distinct and separate beings with bodies like ours (except the Holy Ghost doesn't have a body yet). Since we've recently had so many threads discussing the Trinity, I've been able to understand it far better than I ever did before, and I've come to realize how very similar it is to our own LDS belief about the Godhead. Yet the "Trinity" remains contradictory, because its still in the state of complexity without the "simple" solution or answer becoming clear.

Again using the analogy of the three blind men and the elephant- I think the doctrine of the Trinity is mostly correct, but that it fails to see the "whole picture". The "parts" have been identified as best they can be- the legs are like trees, the trunk is like a snake, the tail is like a rope... but trying to put these parts together is confusing and complex without sight. That sight was granted to Joseph Smith in the First Vision, identifying the "elephant" and making the complex tree/snake/rope beast something simple and comprehensible.