Philosophy Forum is closing

  • Thread starter Evo
  • Start date
  • #1
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
The Philosophy forum will be closing in one week, Monday the 15th. All threads will be closed and merged into General Discussion. The reason is that the Philosophy forum over the past couple years has been almost impossible to moderate fairly and two out of three threads end up locked. Please finish up any discussion you have there. Thanks for your understanding.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
Diffy
441
0
It is already in the lounge, and a sub forum of "General Discussion"

Can we please keep it and just not moderate it? Aside from Advertising, spam and what not.

Heck, you can call it Non academic philosophy if you wish. I think there are a lot of people in this forum that have philosophical questions but are not researchers. To me it is fun to have such discussions.
 
  • #3
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
It is already in the lounge, and a sub forum of "General Discussion"

Can we please keep it and just not moderate it? Aside from Advertising, spam and what not.

Heck, you can call it Non academic philosophy if you wish. I think there are a lot of people in this forum that have philosophical questions but are not researchers. To me it is fun to have such discussions.
It's been non-academic since the beginning. It needs to remain consistant with our scientific standards for the forum and that has proven to be impossible to maintain. If someone has a real question about science, it should be posted in the proper science forum where it can be addressed by members and staff that have actual knowledge of the subject. If it just random musing, it can be posted in GD, if it meets the forum guidelines.
 
  • #4
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,014
1,318
The philosophical implications of this decision are vast and profound. Please discuss. :wink:
 
  • #5
Maui
774
2
It seems Niels Bohr was right - "It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how nature is. Physics concerns what can we say about nature."


It seems unclear where the interpretational issues will be discussed, since it's impossible to ban them.
 
  • #6
Ferris_bg
88
0
I want to use this post to thank all the people who followed and wrote in this forum. Thank you for the time spend here, we had some very nice discussions and it was always a pleasure to me to read your posts and share my thoughts with you. I wish you all the best guys, and always remember to "live your life as though your every act were to become a universal law".

Take care,
Dimitar
 
  • #7
It seems Niels Bohr was right - "It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how nature is. Physics concerns what can we say about nature."


It seems unclear where the interpretational issues will be discussed, since it's impossible to ban them.

I believe all of science details what we can say about nature, not just physics itself.

@the topic: That kind of sucks for me seeing as I found some of the threads rather interesting (I mostly read them). But I can see the plight of a moderator trying to discern what is a post that remains within the guidelines and what posts do not. I get it in that sense. There is a lot of grey area in philosophy because it isn't black and white, just more abstract in thought.

Like I said before, I get it when it concerns moderation, but I feel that it is not good in terms of the community that wishes to discuss topics that don't necessarily pertain to any of the sciences without being muffled by other threads in general discussion.
 
  • #8
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
Like I said before, I get it when it concerns moderation, but I feel that it is not good in terms of the community that wishes to discuss topics that don't necessarily pertain to any of the sciences without being muffled by other threads in general discussion.
The PF community doesn't want philosophy. It's mostly just the same 2-3 people that post in philosophy over and over and they don't really contribute to the rest of the forum. They will be happier finding a real philosophy forum, and we wish them luck in their new philosophy home.

Of course posts to other PF subforums that follow the posting guidelines are still welcome.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
Will there be some type of forum so that I can read the threads posted in this forum, or will it all just be gone, wiped from PF's existence?
 
  • #10
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
Will there be some type of forum so that I can read the threads posted in this forum, or will it all just be gone, wiped from PF's existence?
They will be dumped into General Discusssion as read only. I guess that includes the older philosophy threads of people having third eyes, communing with the universe, the "one whatever gibberish", it was a looney bin. :bugeye:

We did manage to raise the bar, bit by bit, but could never quite get there.
 
  • #11
cobalt124
61
32
They will be dumped into General Discusssion as read only. I guess that includes the older philosophy threads of people having third eyes, communing with the universe, the "one whatever gibberish", it was a looney bin. :bugeye:

We did manage to raise the bar, bit by bit, but could never quite get there.

I'm in agreement with this action and the reasons, but not wholly with your statement above, as I found plenty of worthwhile reading in the Philosophy Forum, though there was gibberish there too. I'm glad we are not losing the threads.

For anyone who may not know there is in the Philosophy Napster a list of online communities. Philosophy Forums (you see, it's still PF!) seems to have similar principles to PF and does seem to cover the range from "proper" philosophy to pseudophilosopy. However if you upset them your name seemsto be put on a list alongside a scathing comment as to why you were banned. Had some fun reading through some of the reasons.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
NWH
107
0
While I understand why it's being done, I think it's quite sad to see a scientific forum reject philosophy. Philosophy asks questions to which there are currently no answers and some of these questions have profound scientific implications. Such as the observations of matter by a conscious mind, our place in the universe, what exists beyond, these are real scientific, non religious questions which people should be encouraged to explore. One day we will understand these things and have answers to these questions, on that day they will no longer be philosophy and will be true science.

This is why I find it disappointing to see it go; while I understand there needs to be some standards and order to the forum, discussion shouldn't be diluted to filter out the unknown, by doing so we're limiting our levels of thought and teaching people to be closed minded. People shouldn't think selectively and everyone pursuing the field of science should be encouraged to think with an open mind, some of the greatest and most influential scientists of our past were philosophers, we should never forget that.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
lmoh
30
0
Heh, I guess there's no room for the philosophically minded scientist (though I guess that sounds like an oxymoron). I'm okay and understand the decision, but wouldn't it be better if we just kept the "philosophy forum" as a read only archive rather than merging it with the "general discussion". It seems rather messy, making it difficult for anyone who wants to read (or reread) the old threads.
 
  • #14
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
If a question is mainstream and has value, it can be discussed in the appropriate science forum, there is no need for a separate forum. The goal of PF is to discuss known, accepted, mainstream science.
 
  • #15
Drakkith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
2022 Award
22,260
6,344
While I understand why it's being done, I think it's quite sad to see a scientific forum reject philosophy.

You misunderstand. The overwhelming majority of threads aren't open minded and promoting new views, they are WORTHLESS. They make no logical sense, they are hugely speculative, don't follow the rules of philosophy, etc. It's like trying to discuss basic science and having 75% of everyone you talk to not understand basic math and shoving their personal theories down your face. The forum isn't rejecting philosophy, it is trimming the dead branches off that are weighing the rest of the plant down. If you have a valid philosophical question, post it in the general forum. Having a separate philosophy forum just invites people who actually have no idea what philosophy is to post their personal views.
 
  • #16
Ryan_m_b
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
5,956
720
While I understand why it's being done, I think it's quite sad to see a scientific forum reject philosophy.
Just to add to what Drakkith has said please don't take it as read that if we do not allow something on this site that we are rejecting it as important to science. An excellent example of this is our restriction on speculation and personal theories, as many of us here are scientists we fully appreciate the importance of speculation however it has proven near impossible to maintain standards if that is allowed on a site where anyone can come and post.
 
  • #17
Andre
4,509
74
Just an observation from the sideline. The philosophy forum had stringent guidelines, General Discussion not so much. Would that mean that sup par entries for the dedicated forum now would be harder to sanction in GD?
 
  • #18
micromass
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Insights Author
22,178
3,316
Just an observation from the sideline. The philosophy forum had stringent guidelines, General Discussion not so much. Would that mean that sup par entries for the dedicated forum now would be harder to sanction in GD?

All philosophy threads will be locked, so there won't be any philosophy entries in GD. New threads have to be posted in the relevant science forums. If it doesn't meet the guidelines of those forums, then they will be locked.
 
  • #19
Jimmy Snyder
1,095
20
  • #20
arildno
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
10,089
135
Perhaps TD should be opened again? :devil:
 
  • #21
Ryan_m_b
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
5,956
720
Perhaps TD should be opened again? :devil:
We're getting rid of one moderation headache and you want us to bring back the worse one of all? :tongue2:
 
  • #22
arildno
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
10,089
135
We're getting rid of one moderation headache and you want us to bring back the worse one of all? :tongue2:
Just curious about the "law-of-the-lever"-guy and other notables. Where have they gone?
Are they stomping around outside, hankering and yammering to get in here , like a demon horde from outer space?

Besides, I believe the "Religion"-subforum was deleted much faster than TD..
 
  • #23
Ryan_m_b
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
5,956
720
Just curious about the "law-of-the-lever"-guy and other notables. Where have they gone?
Are they stomping around outside, hankering and yammering to get in here , like a demon horde from outer space?
Generally those type of people keep it up for a couple of days and then get bored and go away. It's not unusual to get people that claim they will never give up...before giving up after no time at all.
 
  • #25
NWH
107
0
You misunderstand. The overwhelming majority of threads aren't open minded and promoting new views, they are WORTHLESS. They make no logical sense, they are hugely speculative, don't follow the rules of philosophy, etc. It's like trying to discuss basic science and having 75% of everyone you talk to not understand basic math and shoving their personal theories down your face. The forum isn't rejecting philosophy, it is trimming the dead branches off that are weighing the rest of the plant down. If you have a valid philosophical question, post it in the general forum. Having a separate philosophy forum just invites people who actually have no idea what philosophy is to post their personal views.
I do understand, people talk a load of nonsense and it clogs up valuable space as well as wasting valuable moderating time. I just find it disappointing to say "no philosophy forum" period as opposed to taking necessary action to maintain discussion. You'll probably find people continue to post nonsense anyway and moderators will just have to do the same amount of work, in which case it was more beneficial to have the philosophy forum in the first place.
 
  • #26
Ryan_m_b
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
5,956
720
I do understand, people talk a load of nonsense and it clogs up valuable space as well as wasting valuable moderating time. I just find it disappointing to say "no philosophy forum" period as opposed to taking necessary action to maintain discussion. You'll probably find people continue to post nonsense anyway and moderators will just have to do the same amount of work, in which case it was more beneficial to have the philosophy forum in the first place.
Thank you for the feedback but what necessary action do you think hasn't been taken? The problem is that the majority of threads here just get locked because they don't fit the rules. This section of the forum is underused, attracts crackpots and doesn't add much to the site. In effect it's vestigial and taking up a space that a more relevant subforum could use.
 
  • #27
Drakkith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
2022 Award
22,260
6,344
I do understand, people talk a load of nonsense and it clogs up valuable space as well as wasting valuable moderating time. I just find it disappointing to say "no philosophy forum" period as opposed to taking necessary action to maintain discussion. You'll probably find people continue to post nonsense anyway and moderators will just have to do the same amount of work, in which case it was more beneficial to have the philosophy forum in the first place.

If we had a Quantum Teleportation Forum that attracted all kinds of nonsense and we chose to close it, would you have a problem with that? I wouldn't because it easily falls under Quantum Physics. Similarly a valid philosophical question should be posted in the General forum. Certain concepts simply attract a lot of people who *think* they know what they are talking about but in reality don't at all. It's far better and easier for practically everyone if we didn't have to worry about attracting those kind of people in the numbers that are attracted to the Philosophy forum. Frankly I don't see what the problem is. We still allow discussion about philosophy, so is it that philosophy just doesn't have it's own forum? Also, keep in mind that philosophy was ALREADY under the general discussion section.

Plus, I guarantee you that the mods will have FAR less work to do without a Philosophy title attracting all kinds of people who shouldn't be here. Unlike most of the rest of the forum, people tend to think of philosophy as having "no rules" and that you don't need to know anything to discuss philosophy. This leads to gross misuse and is simply a huge waste of time.
 
  • #28
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
Plus, I guarantee you that the mods will have FAR less work to do without a Philosophy title attracting all kinds of people who shouldn't be here. Unlike most of the rest of the forum, people tend to think of philosophy as having "no rules" and that you don't need to know anything to discuss philosophy. This leads to gross misuse and is simply a huge waste of time.
BINGO!

Some people think that if you use REALLY BIG WORDS it's philosophy. :tongue2: Some of the most ridiculously pompous, meaningless posts I've ever read are the ones in philosophy. It's like they think if they make the post hard to read they'll gain credibility, no, it's still nonsense.
 
  • #29
NWH
107
0
Thank you for the feedback but what necessary action do you think hasn't been taken? The problem is that the majority of threads here just get locked because they don't fit the rules. This section of the forum is underused, attracts crackpots and doesn't add much to the site. In effect it's vestigial and taking up a space that a more relevant subforum could use.
Instate a rule that says in bold "comply to philosophy educational standards or risk being banned" and then simply ban people when they break the rules.

Having this sub forum is likely a good thing, because while yes it might attract crackpot discussions, at least these discussions are limited to one place. Getting rid of this sub forum won't get rid of people's desires to ask these questions, they will just find somewhere else to ask them and the problem will become more wide spread across the entire forum.

This acts as a learning experience as well. If people want to learn/discuss philosophy they should read the stickies and read the rules and make an effort to comply to your standards. Giving them a temporary ban will likely encourage them to go elsewhere, think about the subject they're discussing and when they return make more effort to stay on topic and keep discussion educational.

Perhaps you've already tried this, in which case ignore what I've said, but I've been around on Internet forums for over a decade now and the one thing I've learned is that having strict rules and having these sort of dust bin sections are a good thing for the rest of the forum. They keep other sections clean and offer a place for people to vent, in this case you're filtering out undesirable posters who do no wish to learn philosophy, people who are likely to show the rest of the forum the same disrespect should this sub forum not be here.
 
  • #30
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
Thanks, but we have no interest in keeping a forum for crackpots. We've had great success in closing forums that were attracting crackpots. The crackpots find other internet homes.
 
  • #31
Drakkith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
2022 Award
22,260
6,344
Instate a rule that says in bold "comply to philosophy educational standards or risk being banned" and then simply ban people when they break the rules.

PEOPLE. DON'T. READ. THE. RULES.
EVER.
That is a problem with the whole forum, not just the Philosophy forum. I know I didn't even think to read the rules when I first started posting. I'm amazed by things I said back then before I learned about science. Evo, delete all my posts from before 2011!

Having this sub forum is likely a good thing, because while yes it might attract crackpot discussions, at least these discussions are limited to one place. Getting rid of this sub forum won't get rid of people's desires to ask these questions, they will just find somewhere else to ask them and the problem will become more wide spread across the entire forum.

The issue is that people who don't know anything about Philosophy don't desire to talk about philosophy until they see the big title of "Philosophy Forum". It invites them in. It coaxes them to it with warm scented candles and a prize at the bottom of the box.
This acts as a learning experience as well. If people want to learn/discuss philosophy they should read the stickies and read the rules and make an effort to comply to your standards. Giving them a temporary ban will likely encourage them to go elsewhere, think about the subject they're discussing and when they return make more effort to stay on topic and keep discussion educational.

The vast majority of people who post in the Philosophy forum do NOT want to learn Philosophy. They want to talk about their own little idea and nothing else.

Perhaps you've already tried this, in which case ignore what I've said, but I've been around on Internet forums for over a decade now and the one thing I've learned is that having strict rules and having these sort of dust bin sections are a good thing for the rest of the forum. They keep other sections clean and offer a place for people to vent, in this case you're filtering out undesirable posters who do no wish to learn philosophy, people who are likely to show the rest of the forum the same disrespect should this sub forum not be here.

The good thing is that people who know little about philosophy don't even associate it with science. The two aren't even related to them. So without a big glaring sign to tell them it's ok to discuss philosophy they won't do it.
 
  • #32
Vanadium 50
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
29,627
15,116
The problem is that the majority of threads here just get locked because they don't fit the rules.

Ah...if it were only just a majority. I just counted. It's 82% that get locked or deleted. Eighty-two percent.
 
  • #33
Drakkith
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
2022 Award
22,260
6,344
Ah...if it were only just a majority. I just counted. It's 82% that get locked or deleted. Eighty-two percent.

Like I said. Vast majority.
 
  • #34
Evo
Mentor
23,925
3,264
People don't read the rules.
 
  • #35
arildno
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
10,089
135
Having this sub forum is likely a good thing, because while yes it might attract crackpot discussions, at least these discussions are limited to one place. Getting rid of this sub forum won't get rid of people's desires to ask these questions, they will just find somewhere else to ask them and the problem will become more wide spread across the entire forum.
That fear of oozing is misplaced.
Years ago, PF hosted the socalled "Theory Development" forum where people could discuss off beat ideas (typically their own pet theories).
TD was a terrible place, far worse than today's Philosophy forum, with a lot more people hanging out there with far more idiotic ideas.
I remember there was some apprehension that closing TD would lead to an ooze effect like you refer to, but that never happened.
Instead, those individuals left the whole place.
And, that was a good thing, because it dried up the trickle of ooze into the general forums already caused by the PRESENCE of TD.
 

Suggested for: Philosophy Forum is closing

Replies
5
Views
396
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
346
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
415
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
395
  • Last Post
Replies
20
Views
876
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
403
Replies
70
Views
4K
Top