Unorthodox Approaches in Philosophy: Challenging the Status Quo

[sameandnot]

is there some substantial, philosophical problem with exploring unorthodox questions, through unorthodox approaches, within the philosophical community?

do we need a "philosophy mom" to restrict us to the "proper way" of examining ideas?

why the censoring of intellectual exploration? do we all learn the same way? is the "proper way" the right way, and the only right way?
can we say that anyone is perfectly knowledgeable, so as to assume control over the creative exploration of ideas? i think not.

anyone notice the "boxing of creativity" and "free play" that is occurring in "philosophy" forums? does anyone care? does anyone approve?

why do you answer the way you do?

 

[iamsharpie]

While having no real experience in philosophy forums in and of themselves, I do know that philosophy follows logic. Any viewpoint may be valid given that the path to such a viewpoint is guided by true statements.

The problem occurs when to seemingly opposing viewpoints are perfectly logically valid.

So, most public forums have a set of controls (protocol or rules of conduct) to prevent full force confrontation. When was the last time you saw one philosopher kill another over a seemingly opposing viewpoint? Social stigma toward physical violence prevents such action (as it doesn't make you right).

So such rules are needed on philosophy forums. Because the internet is fairly anonymous (another discussion entirely), flamewars tend to erupt fairly easily because there is no control mechanism. Therefore a much more artificial mechanism must be enforced. If not, every philosophical disscussion would have the opportunity to become a full-fledged flamewar.

Therefore, each view given in its entirety and examined at every step in its conclusion can be perceived as truth or as false.

There is no one path of learning. There are many schools of thought. Think of them as tools for different problems. Some problems are easier to think about from one school's point of view while others are more complementary to another school.

Just like those seemingly opposing viewpoints.

 

[bomba923]

I do not believe there is a "proper way" to carry this out, but
there are things we tend to logically avoid:

-oversimplification
-lack of precise definitions
-illogical construction from premises to argument
-Religious or faulty premises
-for more, check the Philosophy Forum Guidelines

From my perspective, we prefer to discuss philosophy in the context of reason (and logic).
It seems that certain people have problems with this, and find it too "stifling".

But personally, I am grateful for the level of moderation we have here at PF.

 

[Dmstifik8ion]

An explanation forthcoming for the reason a particular thread is locked might be helpful.

 

[sameandnot]

for real, dmstifik8tion.

we are adults, and what's more Philosophers (though we may not always act like it) and we should be capable of working out the "problems", without being stifled or censored, from without.

can we try? instead of jumping to legislative authority/tyranny/dominance?

 

[Evo]

is there some substantial, philosophical problem with exploring unorthodox questions, through unorthodox approaches, within the philosophical community?

Discussing nonsense isn't acceptable.

Tossing out a question without enough information to carry out a productive discussion is not acceptable.

I suggest you read the philosophy guidelines if you aren't sure what is and is not acceptable.