distinct threads
Posted: 22 May 2011 02:57 PM   [ Ignore ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  143
Joined  2008-09-27

I’m posting this in Philosophy (knowing full well that it might get moved) because i think that it’s in this forum that we have a particular need for somewhat more distinct threads.

I understand that it’s forum policy both to split threads where the conversation seems to split and to merge threads where they seem to become redundant.  I agree with this in theory, and perhaps even in practice—i haven’t seen it misapplied—but I’m also concerned with how it might be applied, and this has inhibited me from starting specific threads that i would like to see.

For instance, definitional threads would be very useful.  People talk past eachother for pages on end without knowing what the other means by certain key words… and it’s not really reasonable to expect people to go read a 1000-post existing thread on a topic as broad as “free will” to find clues.  They would, though, i believe, read shorter threads on defining:

causality

force

determinism

will

self

freedom

and other subjects.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 May 2011 03:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15370
Joined  2006-02-14

You are welcome to start up distinct threads on these and other subjects, as you like. The problem in any philosophical discussion is that all subjects eventually run together, and it’s not possible in principle to (for example) separate a discussion of determinism from one of causality, or one on causality from one on force, et cetera. Policing them in order to keep them separate would be impossible. So long as you keep that in mind, no worries.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 May 2011 03:57 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  143
Joined  2008-09-27

oh good.  My chief worry was that might get all thrown together… i mean, i see that there is a reason for fatigue over multiple free-will threads, and i was concerned that i might be seen as making the problem worse by trying to add specific threads… that maybe there was a desire to keep the subject “packed together” in one or two threads. 

As long as that’s not the case, i’m happy.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 May 2011 07:09 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15370
Joined  2006-02-14
isaac - 22 May 2011 03:57 PM

oh good.  My chief worry was that might get all thrown together… i mean, i see that there is a reason for fatigue over multiple free-will threads, and i was concerned that i might be seen as making the problem worse by trying to add specific threads… that maybe there was a desire to keep the subject “packed together” in one or two threads. 

As long as that’s not the case, i’m happy.

The concern is with free will threads in particular, which in fact we’ve allowed to grow like weeds. There are perhaps half a dozen or more threads now that should really be merged into the big thread. But it’s not a big deal.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2011 01:41 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  143
Joined  2008-09-27

Now, see, that’s exactly the sort of talk that makes me nervous.  I’m happy that one thread is focusing on how to talk about the “lack of moral crisis if fw/ccfw is not true”. Some that i’ve started may, i hope, focus on other things.  Ghettoizing the subject by merging everything together seems to me like it would be extremely counter-productive to discourse.

And it might be especially discouraging to new members.  I mean, who wants to read a 1000-post thread before joining in?  Who wants a thread with a bunch of people who’ve just jumped on at the end?  I realize that there seem to be “plenty of people” who are not shy… but i expect there’s more who are shy.

I’m hoping that “it’s not a big deal” means that many threads can continue.  After all, it seems to be something people want to talk about, and how they want to talk about it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 May 2011 05:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

Isaac, as you may have noticed, many of the threads in the CFI forum change completely from their initial topic.  This is frusterating to some, and they may even ask that people get back to the original discussion.  While I tend to be a purist and align myself with that idea, I’ll be willing to bet, that as interesting as your suggested topics would be to discuss, within ten or fifteen posts someone has switched each of them back to a discussion of freewill vs. determinism.  snake LOL

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile