• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Thoughts and suggestions for forum improvement

ninjadanslarbretabar said:
hello, anyone, ??



*posting a trap*
2380909042_72c329faae_o.jpg

*seeking attention*
Click to expand...

SEXII as hell ;)
 
MyDoorsAreOpen said:
We have a long standing rule here in P&S that everyone's worldview and beliefs get respected equally.
Click to expand...

Really? REALLY?

I can't believe anyone would think like this. Let me give an example why...

My genuine religious belief and worldview is that women should be subservient to men and have part of their genitals removed just after birth to make sure they don't enjoy sex too much.

Obviously I don't really believe that, it was just an example, but quite a lot of people do. Should we really respect these people's views on the subject?

Some beliefs have very negative consequences and are not worthy of respect.
 
MrM said:
Really? REALLY?

I can't believe anyone would think like this. Let me give an example why...

My genuine religious belief and worldview is that women should be subservient to men and have part of their genitals removed just after birth to make sure they don't enjoy sex too much.

Obviously I don't really believe that, it was just an example, but quite a lot of people do. Should we really respect these people's views on the subject?

Some beliefs have very negative consequences and are not worthy of respect.
Click to expand...

You do make a good point, as advocating harm towards other people is expressly against the principles of this website, and if push came to shove, that rule (sitewide) would take precedence over the rule of respecting others' beliefs (specific to P&S).

So if you see a clear instance of someone using their worldview to justify causing another person harm (or even just advocating harm towards others), feel free to let one of us mods know!

Other than that, this rule stands. We nurture a diverse garden of worldviews and beliefs, for a wide variety of people.
 
Should we really respect these people's views on the subject?
Click to expand...

mmm...what if we take the opposite approach, and we subject all views to criticism, particularly our own? It's an irony of the case where each view accords DISRESPECT, but culminating in mutual respect for all views (until a rare few receive definitive criticism and an even rarer couple stand up to scrutiny).

I think that we'd do best respecting anyone's right to express any view (even those most deplorable), but we also have to respect people's right to express criticism thereon. Sans personal attacks, this is how debate can turn into fruitful mutual exchange and a learning experience.

ebola
(memberator out)
 
Rated E said:
At some point, maybe, but all the time?

The problem is that it's the same thing over and over again.

Person A is discussing something or other

Person B: don't worry about that, see the whole world is a unified whole of existence and we have atoms that are recycled so (leap of reasoning >) that means that we will be reincarnated when we die.

Person C: I think God wants us to be happy so as long as your moral character is strong you will prevail and learn one a valuable lesson that God intended for you to learn.

Person A: ok so what's this got to do with *blah*?

Person B and C: What's it got to do with it?! It's everything, it's got everything to do with it!

Person A: Ok but couldn't I relate almost any topic to any other topic with that kind of reasoning? ... I meant in a less sporadically general sense, what's it got to do with it?

Person B: maybe you should try meditating.

Person C: you're going to hell bro.

Person A: well this was a great conversation.
Click to expand...

I know this is an ancient post but I only just looked at this thread for the first time today (in a moment of procrastination from supposedly doing something useful) and this post is totally spot on (and funny).

The problem is that quite often 'spirituality' is used as a cover for fuzzy, poorly articulated ideas which instead of having real substance just rely on new agey catchphrases to make the poster sound profound. Everything is connected. The whole world is alive. The universe is conscious. We are one. You are closed minded for not going along with this.
 
^ OK then, can you give an example of a spiritual discussion you've seen here that does meet your definition of substantive?

I have been known to talk about 'everything is connected' and 'we are one', but I use them where appropriate, that is, in answer to questions that are blatantly metaphysical in nature, and the original poster is looking to get a new subjective view. I don't use them as a non-sequitur answer to anything and everything.
 
^ We definitely welcome this. Follow the same protocol as in CE&P and DITM: the subject line should be the original author's title, the link to the original source should be provided if available, and the original author, publication, and copyright date should be noted regardless. Post the article as one block of text, with your (preferably minimal) commentary afterward, or in a separate post if you've got a lot of comments to make. Also, it is entirely up to the moderators to determine where the border lies between reputable journalism and fringe propaganda, and hatemongering and scaremongering will always be deemed the latter.

Articles related to political philosophy belong here, but ones pretty much only about a current event will be moved to CE&P.

Articles related to mind-brain issues in philosophy belong here, but ones pretty much only about psychology or neuroscience will be moved to S&T.
 
Last edited:
One word.....


Re-brand!!!

It was once called Thoughts and awareness...

and now Philosophy and Spirituality

I say we call it logical discussion and irreverent discourse.

any other suggestions for re-branding?
 
Thank you B9. I have to agree, I think this forum is in a little bit of a boom. It's not the gritty slum it was around '05, that's for sure! I don't see any point in a name change.
 
We definitely welcome this. Follow the same protocol as in CE&P and DITM: the subject line should be the original author's title, the link to the original source should be provided if available, and the original author, publication, and copyright date should be noted regardless. Post the article as one block of text, with your (preferably minimal) commentary afterward, or in a separate post if you've got a lot of comments to make. Also, it is entirely up to the moderators to determine where the border lies between reputable journalism and fringe propaganda, and hatemongering and scaremongering will always be deemed the latter.
Click to expand...

Sounds sensible...well put too, but I was thinking mainly of posts of essays that I authored. These essays tend to be, however, hatemongering, scaremongering, fringe propaganda though. ;)
 
Is there any possibilt of de-geeking the forum ie. making it more friendly to those who haven't studied philosphy? Thats not meant to be rude (I is geek) but so often the conversations start dropping things about famous philosphers schools of thought; that really don't make a great deal of sense to the unlearned.

I guess its there in the name; Thought and Awareness might make it seem more easily navgable. I'm frightened (woah!) of enterring some of these debates, as I know that many people have digested a lot more educational philosophy then me and can quickly poke holes in my argument, using Plato or Satre or Dr Seuss as their source. This doesn't really allow for original thinking, IMO- that is, if even thought can said to be personally original....

Anyhow, just a thought- I love this forum, but it can be quite alienating in a small, internet forum type of way...

PEACE :)
 
swilow, that's a persistent problem that I'm not really sure how to solve. It really irks me when someone who's clearly not learned or eloquent posts something they clearly consider sincerely thoughtful and worthy of discussion, and more erudite posters reply to them condescendingly, and try to tell them they clearly don't know shit about that topic. I agree -- one shouldn't need to have taken courses and read books on philosophy (or spirituality) to be able to contribute good discussions here. I really think all truly curious people are philosophers whether they know it or not.

I'm aware that many BLers avoid this forum because they're intimidated by it, and afraid they'll be made to feel stupid if they post.

I'm afraid I might not be much good for the de-geeking of P&S. I am, after all, pretty geeky, and naturally use a lot of big words and flowery language when I talk. (Maybe I should PM michael, and see if his terse, to-the-point style would lend something good to the modship here :) ) I'm unschooled in academic philosophy, though, and quite encouraging of others who are as DIY about philosophy as I am.

It's also hard to separate out those who are intimidated by this forum, from those who just plain old aren't interested in most of the things we talk about here.

I still oppose us going back to the name 'Thoughts and Awareness'. I feel that the extra topics that that name was designed to be inclusive of, already are adequately covered by other forums (S&T, CE&P, SO, and Words). All I remember from the the T&A days were sciencey people, who clearly felt that science pwned philosophy, spirituality, and many other 'headier' subjects, arguing bitterly with posters who didn't feel this way. And I don't miss those days.
 
I'll chime in, but as you read this, keep in mind that out of MDAO and I, I am the more severe one on this matter (as in, it is probably more my fault than his).

But my main objection is people posting incoherent crap when they're high. For this, there is the PD social, the blog, TR if you style it properly, and even our social here (I think... it's been ages since I'd been there).

Different people have different things that they are good at. If you feel strongly about an issue, please feel free to express it here. I'd be more than happy to publicly humiliate anyone who makes fun of you (as I have done in the past, several times).

So while I am severe about the no drugged-posting thing, I am even more opposed to personal attacks.

So feel free to post anything so long as it is coherent, and should anyone dare attack you, they will at the very least receive a warning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top