Announcement: New Rules for the PF Philosophy forum beginning January 1, 2011

[Physics-Learner]

There is a difference between posting your new theory / speculating and making a post about your thoughts / opinion on a specific subject.

this last sentence is not clear to me on what you are comparing when you say there is a difference.

according to the rules that you just posted, the relationships forum should be eliminated.

so a last time to you - philosophy is not the same as the theory of relativity.

i actually enjoyed some of the relationship threads. as i used to enjoy some of the philosophy threads - for the exact opposite reason that i like the other threads.

if i want to know about relativity, i am asking for specific scientific knowledge about a specific topic. i don't want someone's personal opinion.

if i happen to ask a question regarding so and so's philosophy, then i am not asking for a personal opinion.

but TO ME, one is limiting philosophy too much to use only mainstream ideas. i don't think i will ever use the philosophy forum as it is now. i have very little interest in what so and so thinks, just because he was the starter of some accepted idea.

so rename the forum to something like "formalized philosophy", and place it somewhere other than the LOUNGE, where games and relationships exist.

and then perhaps have a more relaxed "philosophy" in the lounge section.

i have no source to cite, this is just my personal opinion, which i am still allowed to present here in the feedback forum.

 

[Evo]

The Philosophy forum used to be in other sciences, but it was so bad that it was moved.

The current rules are an attempt to see if the level of discussion can be brought up to be acceptable. If you have a post that is truly philosophical, then it should not be a problem to support that. If you can't, then maybe it's suitable for GD.

 

[Physics-Learner]

hi evo,

i guess i was not aware of GD. i was thinking that was a description of a set of forums, not that it was a forum in itself.

i have what i think (and have already presented) philosophies about the creation of the universe, time, the existence of god, etc.

i truly don't know if they are acceptable under the current rules or not. i can say that i almost never develop a philosophical opinion based upon some mainstream philosophical thought process.

it may turn out that it is in tune with something mainstream, or it may not. for the most part, i would not know whether my "personal opinion" was mainstream or not.

for example - the existence of god. i don't think we can look beyond the black box (our universe) that we exist in. our very definition of god is the creator of our universe, which specifically implies that god "was around" when our universe was not. therefore, god is not a part of this universe. so we do not have, nor will we ever have one iota of scientific information about "god".

therefore i find that theism and atheism are both irrational thought processes, because neither is based on any evidence.

the way that you want to do the philosophy forum is fine, as i understand your intentions. i just think it would be much better to move it, since the rules are already in place. i personally have no interest in the new philosophy forum, so i won't look there.

but if it is helpful to others, then great.

 

[Math Is Hard]

Physics-Learner, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I appreciate it. This is still in the experimental phase and your feedback is very important to how we shape this is the future.

You are absolutely right that the forum is in an odd area. One of our science sections would be inappropriate, though.

I am all for original ideas, but it seems unlikely that there will be a well-reasoned and meaningful philosophical post that no philosopher has ever addressed.

But let's say that a member feels that she has come up with a completely original approach to a problem that no one has ever worked on. She can still post that, but we would require that she follow the rule that asks for references. Several different things could happen through the responses:

1) She might find that her approach is completely novel.
2) She might find that her approach is nonsensical.
3) She might find that there are others who worked on the problem and approached it in the same way.
4) She might find that there are others who worked on the problem but that her approach is a little bit different (for better or for worse).

The only problem with this is it requires a substantial base of knowledgeable members. We had trouble building that, and it has been suggested by many members that we can't grow that base until this becomes a serious discussion forum and we restrict the lazy thinking and verbal diarrhea. Building that serious base has always been the biggest part of the problem, IMHO.

 

[Physics-Learner]

thank you math,

as i said, i don't know whether my idea is "accepted" or not. and truly, i don't care.

i consider myself to be a highly logical person, so i think you will find a definite reasoning to my statements.

but to be truthful, at this point (in the philosophy forum) i would feel like i am always having to walk on eggshells, not knowing whether i am going to get reprimanded or not for not following the rules.

i have made quite a number of posts on "philosophical" topics, so one could look back and make judgments about them, regarding suitability for the current forum.

but i can always make a post in the gd area. it is just that i don't know how many "good reasoners" ever go there.

i enjoy a good logical discussion. whenever i give an opinion, i always state the thought processes i used, when formulating that opinion. that way, it can give others a better way to give me feedback.

at this point, i won't use the philosophy forum, because i don't feel comfortable being there. i am all for following the rules of a system. but when i am not sure whether i am following the rules or not, i choose to abstain.

thanks for your feedback, as well.

 

[ptalar]

I mainly peruse the Cosmology and Beyond the Standard Model portions of the physics Forums but I do go to the philosophy forum on many of occasion. In the past I have found things discussed that I had wondered what others had thought about. I recently have been reading the philosophy forums the past couple of weeks and noticed that what has been a lot of interesting threads have been locked. I understand that the Philosophy forum Moderators have decided to focus on improving the caliber of discussion on the forum to focus on referenced works of philosophy and limited new ideas. I must say I am not sure I agree with that approach. Although some of the discussion tends to stray from traditional philosophy to more religious and metaphysical I have found this forum, in the past, to be an excellent potpourri of free thought. It has given me a lot of ideas and thoughts that I have pondered on over the years regardless of whether they have any scientific or philosophic rigor behind them or not. There are accusations of crackpots and kooks dialoguing on this forum. Well so be it. Many of the worlds greatest scientists and philosophers had mental issues also. I rarely post on these forums. I just read and absorb. I find it to be educational and entertaining at the same time. I am sorry to see that the we are tending toward the "Peoples Republic of Physics Forums."

 

[JaredJames]

Many of the worlds greatest scientists and philosophers had mental issues also.

You do realize you don't need to have mental issues to be a crackpot?

I just read and absorb.

Yep, something that kids do a lot and something you really don't want when there is little "scientific or philosophic rigor behind them".

You don't want people assimilating BS.

I am sorry to see that the we are tending toward the "Peoples Republic of Physics Forums."

I'm curious why you believe this is anything but a private forum? It is run how the owners dictate. No one else.

 

[nismaratwork]

I generally would consider a crackpot to meet the legal definition of sanity... otherwise I'd say, "nut", or in a professional setting, "mentally ill", "disturbed", or "unstable". The whole idea behind a crackpot to my thinking isn't a delusional process beyond self-delusion; I like your distinction JnJ.

@ptalar: Go somewhere else, it's still a free internet, but any given destinatino is subject to moderation. If you want to see what it's like in the wild west, go to a usenet chat, or irc channel. Keep your firewall up though...

 

[ptalar]

You do realize you don't need to have mental issues to be a crackpot?


Yep, something that kids do a lot and something you really don't want when there is little "scientific or philosophic rigor behind them".

You don't want people assimilating BS.


I'm curious why you believe this is anything but a private forum? It is run how the owners dictate. No one else.

I just find it to be an interesting place to read. Yes, the forum does give me things to think about once in a while. That is why I sort of like it the way it was.

I realize its a private forum. And they can do what they want. I will probably stop reading this forum as the amount of threads will probably get reduced to zero with only a few threads remaining among the a few tried and true philosophers. I guess I will see if those threads are worth reading.

And yes, I am like a child, I do read and absorb. I will probably never stop, until I die.

 

[ptalar]

I generally would consider a crackpot to meet the legal definition of sanity... otherwise I'd say, "nut", or in a professional setting, "mentally ill", "disturbed", or "unstable". The whole idea behind a crackpot to my thinking isn't a delusional process beyond self-delusion; I like your distinction JnJ.

@ptalar: Go somewhere else, it's still a free internet, but any given destinatino is subject to moderation. If you want to see what it's like in the wild west, go to a usenet chat, or irc channel. Keep your firewall up though...

Yeah, I probably will go away but it won't be because of your request. The forum will probably be closed by the end of the year due to lack of interest. I rarely post on this forum so I have already gone. I mainly read the threads.

And who do you think you are to tell me to go away? Why don't you go away? What makes you so important?

 

[nismaratwork]

Yeah, I probably will go away but it won't be because of your request. The forum will probably be closed by the end of the year due to lack of interest. I rarely post on this forum so I have already gone. I mainly read the threads.

And who do you think you are to tell me to go away? Why don't you go away? What makes you so important?

True, it would of course be a result of your behavior.

I'd add, mine wasn't a request, it was a suggestion that you find some clarity in contrast. Anyway, once you leave or are banned, you'll still be able to read the threads as a guest so... no big loss right?

edit: Are you at all ashamed to have used the equivalent of, "I'm going to bed because I WANT to, not because you TELL me to." ? I'm a little embarrassed for you, and I don't even know you.

 

[JaredJames]

Yeah, I probably will go away but it won't be because of your request. The forum will probably be closed by the end of the year due to lack of interest. I rarely post on this forum so I have already gone. I mainly read the threads.

If it's of no interest, there's no reason to stick around. There are plenty of people here who enjoy the place.

And who do you think you are to tell me to go away? Why don't you go away? What makes you so important?

That attitude isn't welcome here. Nismar pointed out your options, he didn't tell you to go away.

However, if you're only reason for sticking around is this thread and this nonsense then you might as well leave right now.

Just something to think about, consider the number of members and then look at how many complain - ooh look, it's a tiny percentage - must be doing something right after all.

 

[Char. Limit]

The forum will probably be closed by the end of the year due to lack of interest. I rarely post on this forum so I have already gone.

I wonder if you'd be willing to lay some money on your claim that this forum will be closed by the end of the year. Because I'd put my life and everything I own (which isn't much) on the fact that it won't.

And who do you think you are to tell me to go away? Why don't you go away? What makes you so important?

He made a suggestion, not a command. Quit acting all high and mighty, seriously.

 

[ptalar]

I only posted my opinion. Not to be harangued by you self appointed keepers of the faith.

I only posted because MIH suggested I post my opinion.

As far as stats go most people don't complain one way or another. I just felt there was some precious rhetoric going on and I hated to see it go. If you take the population signed on as members vs those that actively participate in this forum you will see a much smaller population.

This was just one of those things where I hate to see change.

And get a thick skin please. If you can't take a little pushback you should not be on the forum either.

 

[ptalar]

I wonder if you'd be willing to lay some money on your claim that this forum will be closed by the end of the year. Because I'd put my life and everything I own (which isn't much) on the fact that it won't.



He made a suggestion, not a command. Quit acting all high and mighty, seriously.

Oh it probably won't I was just challenging the old philosophy masters. I just hope there is enough interesting discussion to keep me reading.

You do realize there will probably be reduced traffic on the thread for a while until a better reputation can get around. Not to say it had a bad reputation to begin with.

 

[nismaratwork]

You really think that after 10 years of steady growth, a change in sub-forum rules will reduce traffic?

You have a very high opinion of yourself, and really, it's not about thick skin; please stop acting like a petulant child.

 

[Evo]

We've had major overhauls in Philosophy before. The last time we decided to raise the bar, the pack that was ruling the philosophy forum left and traffic increased. It seems that an occasional purge when the forum goes downhill has a positive effect in the long run.

 

[nismaratwork]

We've had major overhauls in Philosophy before. The last time we decided to raise the bar, the pack that was ruling the philosophy forum left and traffic increased.

Well, if ptalar's ironclad logic and dispassionate analysis is correct...


...Oh wait, none of that! I know that I've begun to frequent the Phil forum only AFTER these new rules. The bar is raised, and it makes that forum IMO. I don't see the major thinkers there being hindered in any way.

edit: Ptalar: You might find this thread to be useful in your case: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=478815

Now THAT was a suggestion, as opposed to simply offering a notion.

 

[Evo]

Let's not bicker.

 

[nismaratwork]

Yes'm!

 

[cobalt124]

I'm curious why you believe this is anything but a private forum? It is run how the owners dictate. No one else.

And if you don't like it, you don't take part.

The forum will probably be closed by the end of the year due to lack of interest.

Not a chance, and definitely not caused by the forum rules.

There are no self appointed keepers of the faith here, maybe a lot of loyalty towards a forum that is important, that matters to members. Members state what they think and how they feel, nothing else. There may be other forums to go to that are like that, but I bet there are not many.

 

[ptalar]

I am sorry I even stated my opinion here. Let me set the record straight. The Physics Forums is one of my favorite places to visit on the internet. All the forums are absolutely interesting reads. And yes the Phil forum was one of my favorites along with the cosmology forum.

I am done already.

Maybe Evo is right a purge now and then is like refreshing your computer. It makes it run better.

And by the way, I am mainly a reader. I don't post here very often. I am not even a philosopher. I am just a lowly engineer who works in Aerospace in SoCal.

 

[Char. Limit]

I am sorry I even stated my opinion here.

Why the hell are you sorry? You stated your opinion, we said why we disagreed with it. There's nothing to be sorry about!

I can't stand it when people are sorry for things that they shouldn't be apologizing for.

 

[ptalar]

Why the hell are you sorry? You stated your opinion, we said why we disagreed with it. There's nothing to be sorry about!

I can't stand it when people are sorry for things that they shouldn't be apologizing for.

LOL

 

[nismaratwork]

It's always a good thing to come to terms with, and then rationalize the inevitable.

 

[Redbelly98]

The forum will probably be closed by the end of the year due to lack of interest.

You might mean just the Philosophy forum at PF, but others appear to interpret your statement about "the forum" as meaning the entirety of Physics Forums.

 

[nismaratwork]

You might mean just the Philosophy forum at PF, but others appear to interpret your statement about "the forum" as meaning the entirety of Physics Forums.

Ooooohhhh... I hadn't considered that angle... thanks Redbelly98... although I still think that's incorrect (the conclusion of it closng), it is a different view.

 

[Char. Limit]

You might mean just the Philosophy forum at PF, but others appear to interpret your statement about "the forum" as meaning the entirety of Physics Forums.

Oh. Yeah, that's how I was interpreting it. I guess I was wrong, heheh...

 

[nismaratwork]

That's why we have mento-
...
...
... Redbelly... Why is your avatar not a bird with a red belly?

 

[lisab]

That's why we have mento-
...
...
... Redbelly... Why is your avatar not a bird with a red belly?

Oh you just can't see it in that shot...it's a bit further south. You could ask him to show it but beware, he's kind of shy .