Open Letter: Philosophy Forum

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex Nine
It's appropriate you brought this up because an understanding of this is central to proper philosophical discourse. And... well... what you said is a common misunderstanding.

The fact that many people believe different things is not a proof of relativism (that all of their beliefs are simultaneously valid).

If we want people to listen to each other and gain a shared understanding, I'm not sure that it is a very good idea to adopt a relativist approach, which is essentially \"you have your ideas, I have mine, let's not have to change them.\"

---

I disagree with you. I speak here of religious/spiritual beliefs, since the fighting over them on the forum is the problem in which we currently discuss: and that makes sense that it is that particular aspect of philosophy that would cause the most unrest, since it is there that people believe most passionately. I think, perhaps, you were taking my argument and applying it to areas I did not intend it to be applied (my fault for not being clear!) I stated it because the fundamental inherent issue behind all religious beliefs is that they can be neither proved nor disproved. Thus, all are equally valid, and to denounce one's beliefs in favour of another's is absolute folly. There is still plenty of room for discussion without resorting to asserting one's superiority over another.

BTW, the approach I think all of us are hoping for here is not quite as you suggested, but instead: "You have your ideas, I have mine; let's learn to respect that."

I appreciate your list of suggestions for the pending guidelines; if anyone else has further suggestions to add to that list, please speak up.

I respect that! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by icedawg
... the fundamental inherent issue behind all religious beliefs is that they can be neither proved nor disproved.

---

Not necessarily. Sure, there are certain \"axioms\" that religions take for granted, but even those may be questioned for their merit or lack of self-evidence. Looking for proofs and disproofs is part of philosophical investigation. Questioning everything.

Quote:

---

There is still plenty of room for discussion without resorting to asserting one's superiority over another.[/b]

---

Despite appearances, being able to communicate a superior idea does not make one superior.

Quote:

---

BTW, the approach I think all of us are hoping for here is not quite as you suggested, but instead: \"You have your ideas, I have mine; let's learn to respect that.\"[/b]

---

Okay, but, can I tear someone's ideas to shreds and still respect those ideas? I think so. In fact, I think it might show great respect.

For instance, I hope I'm respecting your ideas...?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex Nine
Okay, but, can I tear someone's ideas to shreds and still respect those ideas? I think so. In fact, I think it might show great respect.

For instance, I hope I'm respecting your ideas...?

---

ROFL!!!

BURN!!! :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex Nine
Not necessarily. Sure, there are certain \"axioms\" that religions take for granted, but even those may be questioned for their merit or lack of self-evidence. Looking for proofs and disproofs is part of philosophical investigation. Questioning everything.

---

You're kind of splitting hairs here and dancing around my point. Yes, if one's religious beliefs suggest a vacuum operates via magic, clearly a level of validity can be attached. You know what I'm saying though, so I'm a little lost as to why you're pushing this as you are. The core ideas in any religion, once again, cannot be proved nor disproved; you mention evidence, but religion generally supercedes evidence--it is supposed to be a leap of faith.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex Nine+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ex Nine)</div>

Quote:

---

Despite appearances, being able to communicate a superior idea does not make one superior. [/b]

---

Assuming you're discussing religion--since that's the defined topic here--who is to say what idea is superior? What religion is superior? I think you're missing the point here. :mrgreen:

<!--QuoteBegin-Ex Nine
Okay, but, can I tear someone's ideas to shreds and still respect those ideas? I think so. In fact, I think it might show great respect.

---

That all depends on your definition of "tearing into one's ideas." If it is as you've done now, then certainly the answer is yes. I thought, however, we were discussing blatant harassment and belittlement and outright denunciations and whatnot, but perhaps I was wrong (?)

Again, I think you're missing my point here. We're discussing what we need to do in order to allow for more peaceful, tolerant discussions on religion; at no point did I suggest comparisons and arguments and general questioning must be forbidden. It's all in how it's done, and you've demonstrated a great way of doing so, so if that was always your agenda, then well done. Otherwise, I think perhaps you're not exactly helping now because I'd say the original intent is becoming less clear. I believe you and I want the exact same guidelines in place, seeking the exact same development in future discourse in the philosophy forum on religion, so I'm just not sure where all this is coming from?

You're right, Icedawg.

I was trying to expand on my point that I don't think it's realistic to expect a great deal of tolerance from people on these particular subjects, and that a lack of tolerance is perfectly natural and expected when examining deep issues.

I suppose I'm looking for tolerance of a lack of tolerance?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex Nine
You're right, Icedawg.

I was trying to expand on my point that I don't think it's realistic to expect a great deal of tolerance from people on these particular subjects, and that a lack of tolerance is perfectly natural and expected when examining deep issues.

---

Certainly that's true...very true, given the passion behind beliefs; and very obvious too, given the boundless unrest in the world over the chasms between beliefs. So I guess we should consider these guidelines an experiment, and if people still can't learn to exercise tolerance then we'll look into banning religious topics completely. I just again am reluctant to do so, so I want to give this a try...at least then we will have done all we can right? :wink:

You were forced to before, remember. From what I see it looks like it might happen again.

We have some major pompus religous concited crazy people here, you know? Who think they are better than everyone elce beacse the see the truth, or have "awakened" :P So going over to the philosphy forms usualy makes me sick beacse i feel like i have been tossed into the deep south religous insane people cult... sometimes. If people dint push thier relgion then the the forum woudl be fine. I say just make it a rule that there can be no tolerance of members insulting each others belifes and pushing thier "superior" relgion down our throughts.

Unfortunately, at the same time, the other side isn't much better. They just as harshly discourage or shoot down religious or spiritual ideas. I can't truly vouch for either.

Everyone's looking for a place to belong, it's what religion is usually about. But imo, whilst the philosophy forum is very amusing, it seems to be getting nothing productive done. Keep it up awhile before deciding whether or not to do something about it.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AirRick101+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AirRick101)</div>

Quote:

---

Unfortunately, at the same time, the other side isn't much better. They just as harshly discourage or shoot down religious or spiritual ideas. I can't truly vouch for either.[/b]

---

<!--QuoteBegin-AirRick101
But imo, whilst the philosophy forum is very amusing, it seems to be getting nothing productive done.

---

My sentiments exactly, on both points.

How about creating a separate off-topic forum solely for discussing religious issues, and disallowing the discussion of religion outside of that forum? My personal opinion is that religious debates are utterly pointless; you're NOT going to change someone's fundamental religious beliefs with a few paragraphs on a web forum, all you're going to do is waste bandwidth and most likely piss people off, including yourself. However, I'm sure at least a few people will go to the Religion forum, and that way we can sleep soundly at night knowing that we haven't censored any topics :roll: Thing is, not very much outside of religion and/or "spirituality" gets discussed in the Philosophy forum. At least they'll be able to discuss the other stuff in a civil manner (hopefully). Thoughts?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by DuB

My sentiments exactly, on both points.

How about creating a separate off-topic forum solely for discussing religious issues, and disallowing the discussion of religion outside of that forum?

---

Actually, we already have a separate off-topic section for religious issues, it just happens to fall under 'philosophy' as well.
Perhaps you mean splitting philosophy into 2 sections? Perhaps that's a good idea, but all it would accomplish is the separation of people interested in faith issues and those interested in skepticism.

Either way, we would still need to keep it civil. And to do so requires that some moderator (eg. me) gets accused of being unfair and has to sit each bloody night going through everyone's issues of faith looking for barbs. That's the job I guess....

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Placebo
And to do so requires that some moderator (eg. me) gets accused of being unfair and has to sit each bloody night going through everyone's issues of faith looking for barbs. That's the job I guess....

---

Random server crashes are great for removing un-wanted crud without repocusions :-P


The way I see it
these things happen
they are going to keep happening
why not have some fun with it ??

Design a rating system, purely for the philosiphy forum
all topics start at rating 5
with every reply, posters can rate the topic so far
rating is open to ALL posters
if the average rating falls below 2, say
the topic is locked, the topic author's avatar is changed to a dunces hat
The only way to get control of his avatar again is to acheive a topic rating of 7 in another topic

S'what I'd do
but hey.......

It's often not the topic author's fault that the topic derailed ;)
But the rating system is interesting. I fear it would be abused though. It's easy to fake a number of votes just to mess with someone you don't like.

Ok, well you could modify my Sh*t-Can system that I've used many times

It's a jail forum
completely read-only to everyone except the prisoner(s)
Mods / Admins can Sh*t-Can a user (button in their profile)
and the only forum that the prisoner can access is the Can
if they try to access any other parts, they are re-directed back to the Can

The way I had it set up, was with two chat-bots roaming the Can
One with Sci-Fi information loaded into it's brain
the other with religious info.

These bots would talk to the prisoners constantly
not leave them alone
the prisoners had a sentence length (in days)
after the sentence was up, they could re-join the rest of the forum

The threat of getting Canned was great for keeping unrulely users at bay
plus it provided lots of entertainment for the other users


Another system we had, was an "ignore user" button
if someone wanted to ignore a particular user, just press the button
suddenly, you can't see their posts at all, it's as if their posts weren't there

Mods had a "global ignore user" which meant that no-one could see their posts
all the effects of banning, without the ban
ignored users would get bored (they had no idea no-one could see their posts) and went away without the feeling of indignity of being banned (we got far less hacking attempts using the ignore user, than with banning users)

Use your imagination.

Hahaha, sounds quite fun actually. With some modifications I guess.
I'll see what the admins and mods think of it :)

We had a whole load of quirky custom mods installed
I'll list a few of them out with a brief description if you want

Moved to extended discussion.

By request, this topic was split to : How to conquer a fear (Split from Philosophy forum discuss.). This involves discussion on nesgirl's fear of using the name 'OBE' in place of 'sci-fi' (as I understand)

Here's what I have to say:

1.What should a Philosophy-oriented forum look like?
It should be a place where parties can openly discuss points of view on vaious subjects without fearing excessive attacks.

2. Why don't I visit the Philosophy forum?
Because just about every thread invariatably turns into an attack until posts are reduced to nothing more than, "You're wrong and I'm right." I admit that there have been quite a few intelligent discussions, but the majority remains the as mentioned.

Now, there has to be the disctinction between debate and arguement. As we grow older we learn not to stick our tongues out at others because it's childish. We put aside the "Uh uh / yuh huh!" taunting in favor of intelligable conversations where we discuss our varying views. These debates are not necessarily designed to prove who is right and who is wrong, but rather cause both parties to consider what each other is saying.

I believe in absolute truth. Do I believe I know what it is? Yes, and I bet you do as well. Keep in mind, however, my truth will not be the same as your truth because we've lived different lives. We are essentially living in two different realities bound by different laws and guidelines, causing us to judge based on individual perception. Even if you're not applying the term "absolute truth" to God or religion, it can be applied to the values we hold to be right, be they noble or ignoble.

In conclusion, the debates or discussions within the Philosophy forum should be as two or more people comparing their realities rather than trying to destroy the reality of the other people involved.

:bravo:, Amé, :bravo:!

I think that to simply settle on some cut and dry version of truth because thats what your parents taught you is massively intellectually irrensponsible and dishonest. Any fool can sit in a church or science classroom and take every word they hear as truth.

But the fact is, the reason we have our brains (either God-given or evolved) is to think for ourselves. Not to bow down to the collective ideal of what truth is.

I agree that many threads in the Philosphy forum do reduce to nothing more than name-calling (especially recently) and that is unfortunate. But it's much better than the alternative.

Without having your beliefs challenged from day to day you grow numb to the idea of change. Psychologically, without considering viable alternatives to your beliefs, you tend to disregard information that challenges said belief, and only process information that supports. Strengthening the effects of belief perserverance, belief bias and confirmation bias that already have an impact on our psyche.

To avoid discussion and debate about one's thoughts, opinions and beliefs is to deny the true beauty of what it is to be intelligent.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Amethyst Star
*Keep in mind, however, my truth will not be the same as your truth because we've lived different lives. *

---

Sorry - but then, by definition, it's not "truth". It's subjective reality rather than objective reality.

Truth is truth regardless of what you think/feel/believe. That's what "truth" is.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Amethyst Star
1.What should a Philosophy-oriented forum look like?
It should be a place where parties can openly discuss points of view on vaious subjects without fearing excessive attacks.

---

No, they should fear it! They should fear it being endlessly attacked by a mob of angry bears with big powerful wings.

Then maybe they'll put more thought into their posts. :|

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Ex Nine


No, they should fear it! They should fear it being endlessly attacked by a mob of angry bears with big powerful wings.
*:|

---

Are they tastey? I've never shot an angry bear with big powerful wings...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kimpossible
I've never shot an angry bear with big powerful wings...

---

That's probably because they're angry. And have big powerful wings!