Purge the fools, please!

@HexHammer,

Krumple wrote:

So you are saying every case is as clear as someone posting porn? That you can always pick out someone's intentions behind their posts?

What I am saying is that some intentions are clear, and that you are wrong to say that intentions are always incredibly hard to see. There are many cases where intentions are very easy to see.

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;131457 wrote:

What I am saying is that some intentions are clear, and that you are wrong to say that intentions are always incredibly hard to see. There are many cases where intentions are very easy to see.

Very easy to see? From your perspective? What if you were wrong about your conclusion?

@Krumple,

Krumple;131453 wrote:

---------- Post added 02-23-2010 at 09:58 AM ----------

Sorry, my response was mostly rhetorical.

Yes, I understand. But isn't someone like that perverting the point of this forum? I agree that for practical reasons there is nothing much that can be done except to condemn them. But shouldn't they be condemned? And I do think that to some extent, they infect others. I see some others thanking them. Of course, I also think that for some, including the thankers, it is a case of, "forgive them God, for they do not know what they do".

@Krumple,

Krumple;131435 wrote:

HexHammer;131332 wrote:
It sickens me with all those halfwitted fools pesting the fora. Babbeling about this is a truth, that is a lie. He is good, that one is evil. Too many good topics are worn down with unproductive philosophers who comes with their outdated ways, it's a real shame that they can't be kept to their own fora, where they belong.

I wish the mods and admins would construct some new rules about this.

Thanks.

This post sounds like one of those, "I don't like what you are saying so I want you to go away." Instead of making a counter argument or taking a moment to point out the flaw in their reasoning.

Censorship is pretty much built up on this idea. I don't support it. There are some whom I don't think are here for any philosophical discussion, or a discussion at all, but I wouldn't want them banned or silenced because I might not agree with their posts.

I can see how one might take it that way, but I have encountered enough nonsensical posts that I took it quite differently. I suspect that you have seen enough nonsense posted in order to be able to see it in a different light as well, though I do agree with you in that trying to get rid of the nonsense without someone merely censoring views that the censor dislikes is unlikely to occur in practice.

There could be a section devoted to people who have degrees in philosophy, but the problem with that is that it would exclude thoughtful people who positively contribute to discussions, as well as eliminating most of the people who contribute nonsense. Separating the worthwhile from the worthless is not an easy task, and any plan to do so is likely to lead to either omitting worthwhile things, or leaving in garbage, or both.

The approach that seems to be generally applied at this site is one that is minimally censoring, which, of course, leaves in much garbage. But I would rather have that than a too heavy hand that eliminates too much philosophical dissent.

@Krumple,

Krumple;131459 wrote:

Very easy to see? From your perspective? What if you were wrong about your conclusion?

Then I am wrong. What now?

Since someone could be wrong, intentions are always hard to see, is what you're arguing?

---------- Post added 02-23-2010 at 01:09 PM ----------

Pyrrho wrote:

The approach that seems to be generally applied at this site is one that is minimally censoring, which, of course, leaves in much garbage. But I would rather have that than a too heavy hand that eliminates too much philosophical dissent.

There used to be a heavier hand, but our new owner has put a stop to that. Now we just let people go their merry ways. Or not so merry ways.

@Krumple,

Krumple;131459 wrote:

Very easy to see? From your perspective? What if you were wrong about your conclusion?

Please don't derail the topic with your rethorical mastrubation. It's excatly people like you that I abhore.

@HexHammer,

HexHammer;131465 wrote:

Please don't derail the topic with your rethorical mastrubation. It's excatly people like you that I abhore.

Yeah see here it is. Just because you don't like me or my posts you want to silence me because you are "better" than me right? What you have to say is more important? How is talking about a topic a derail?

@Krumple,

Krumple;131481 wrote:

Yeah see here it is. Just because you don't like me or my posts you want to silence me because you are "better" than me right? What you have to say is more important? How is talking about a topic a derail?

^ Equality run amok.

@HexHammer,

HexHammer;131332 wrote:

It sickens me with all those halfwitted fools pesting the fora. Babbeling about this is a truth, that is a lie. He is good, that one is evil. Too many good topics are worn down with unproductive philosophers who comes with their outdated ways, it's a real shame that they can't be kept to their own fora, where they belong.

I wish the mods and admins would construct some new rules about this.

Thanks.

So to be your sort of philosopher your sort of person is to already know everything you do? or at least to know enough so as not to offend your stomach.
If you think you can go through life only encountering the people you choose to meet, and only learn from those who you think have something valid to contribute then i am sad to say you will become a rather boring person.
If you only want to talk or hear about what you want to talk or hear about you will never learn anything.
If you only see what you want to see, you may as well be blind.

'where they belong' not good enough to be in your presence.

Who do you think you are? asked so as to recieve an answer, not to make a statement.
Are you saying that those who dont share your lofty heights are worth no position at all?

And let me save you an insult, I know am abhorant, but at least i dont think you are.

Why give your thanks if it is only for those whom you think are worthy of them?

So much for this place being a place for growth or for learning if thats the way you want to go.

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;131483 wrote:

^ Equality run amok.

Shouldn't equality be the philosophy? Almost silly that a protest of a clash of ideas is somehow the problem. What censoring does is only tell people to stop thinking differently. Become the robot that I want you to be. If you have any decent please leave it at the door, but you can come in and talk if you support what we have to say.

This is a good thing?

@Krumple,

Krumple;131485 wrote:

Shouldn't equality be the philosophy? Almost silly that a protest of a clash of ideas is somehow the problem. What censoring does is only tell people to stop thinking differently. Become the robot that I want you to be. If you have any decent please leave it at the door, but you can come in and talk if you support what we have to say.

This is a good thing?

But not every idea is equal in worth. Some things people say are just stupid. And certainly some people are more intelligent than others. I would never advocate stopping people from thinking differently, but if I see someone consistently say stupid things, I'm not going to entertain them for long.

"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal".

- Aristotle

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;131488 wrote:

But not every idea is equal in worth. Some things people say are just stupid. And certainly some people are more intelligent than others. I would never advocate stopping people from thinking differently, but if I see someone consistently say stupid things, I'm not going to entertain them for long.

Well isn't that just not responding to what they have to say? There are typically dozens of others involved in the discussion, why not pick up the conversation where you find it most relevant? I don't see why silencing something that is opposed is the best solution.

Zetherin;131488 wrote:

"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal".

- Aristotle

Isn't this topic the inequality Aristotle is referring to?

@HexHammer,

I can't see any need for this kind of witch hunt. (Does that make me a witch?) There are rules; people who break them presumably get banned.

If the rules are inadequate, I see two options, both helpful:

(1) Suggest specific changes to the rules, to make this a better community. I think such a discussion could be interesting and illuminating, although I'm sceptical as to whether any practicable suggestions would emerge. If any do, I'm sure the owner would be interested.

(2) Use the "ignore list" facility. I've never actually used it myself (ironically, the originator of the present thread is the one poster I have considered adding to my still-empty list!), but on unmoderated Usenet, I would find it impossible to survive without a newsreader with a good killfile facility, and if necessary I will employ the "ignore list" facility here. See:

Philosophy Forum - FAQ: General Forum Usage
Dealing with Troublesome Users
Can I block posts, emails and messages from specific users?

@HexHammer,

Krumple wrote:

Well isn't that just not responding to what they have to say? There are typically dozens of others involved in the discussion, why not pick up the conversation where you find it most relevant? I don't see why silencing something that is opposed is the best solution.

Oh, perhaps you are misunderstanding me. You shouldn't silence someone simply on the grounds that they oppose you. That would be immature, and more importantly, unphilosophical. We should entertain good arguments, no matter if they oppose our views. I haven't said otherwise. What I am saying is that we should not treat all opinions as equal. All opinions are not equal, and we should not consider them as such.

The problem is that people often think they are being discriminated against if someone doesn't consider their viewpoint. But it is often the case that their viewpoint is irrelevant, or nonsensical, or poorly thought out. But these people never consider this, do they? They immediately assume they are being "silenced", with one foot in the stirrup on their rebellious high horses with the intention of riding into the 'Land of Equality'. Barf.

@Zetherin,

I think we need to understand that PhilosophyForum is both Philosophy and a Forum, just becuase Philosophy comes first dose not make it any less of a Forum.
Any philosophy are the people who use it and teach it, just as is any forum is for use and to teach. The best ones anyway.
You learn something quite different from both, both valuable if not the reason for the first conection.

Should i feel embarrassed about this post?
Because i'm not, even if i do doubt myself what others are hearing from me.

If you dont like the people in a room, or the room because of its people, it is not their duty because of your dislike for them to leave.
I find this all quite telling and troubling.

@HexHammer,

This is a free facility. Contributors don't need to sign a contract to participate, provided they observe the rules. As pointed out above, there are plenty of ways to avoid vexatious contributors. As regards the quality of the dialog, I spent a few weeks on the Dawkins forum before joining this one, which is extremely tendentious, as you might imagine, and then one other philosophy forum, which was OK but somehow very anonymous. This one has been great and I have learned a lot from it, not least of which is reading viewpoints I disagree with and maintaining equanimity. Sure there are some annoying contributors, and there are probably some who are annoyed by me, but on the whole, it is a great facility.

So - in short, disagree with the OP. Perhaps if the quality doesn't suit, you can start another one, and work on attracting a clientele that will meet your exacting standards?

@HexHammer,

sometime sun wrote:

If you dont like the people in a room, or the room because of its people, it is not their duty because of your dislike for them to leave.
I find this all quite telling and troubling.

That's quite odd for you to feel troubled, considering no one here has claimed that on the basis that someone is disliked they should be forced to leave. Hm. Are you responding to the correct thread?

jeeprs wrote:

So - in short, disagree with the OP. Perhaps if the quality doesn't suit, you can start another one, and work on attracting a clientele that will meet your exacting standards?

I can't imagine how anyone could agree or disagree with the OP really, since it doesn't seem that what he said was clear. Perhaps you can explain to me what you disagree with?

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;131504 wrote:

What I am saying is that we should not treat all opinions as equal. All opinions are not equal, and we should not consider them as such.
QUOTE]

ROFL I love this Zeth. Of course all opinion are not equal If we didn't think that our opinion was the best one we have yet encountered we would not hold them. Opinion by its very nature is unequal. Obviously my opinion is better than yours because its the one I believe.

Thus is the crux of this thread. If someone posts something that truely enlightens us or makes us question ourselves we find their opinion to be of worth because it is likely to either become our opinion, reinforce the opinion we already have by forcing us to rethink our opinion, or become incorporated into our opinion as part of a synthesis of currently held opinion and new information. This forces all things that do not do the above to the realm of substandard opinions. They are stupid because they aren't our or anything resembling the base tenets of our opinions.

Now addressing the "intent" section fo the thread. We must assume in order to have a cohesive forum that is not brought down, like so many others, by flame and trawling, that people know how to behave with decorum. The intent of a post should be neither here, nor there. We should (my opinion of course) assume that any person who posts those types of things already covered in the forum rules knows better, and not feel like we are some type of thinking elitist (suffer from educated guilt?) if we ban them for breaking rules they agreed to keep. This is an internet forum not subject to Free Speech clauses in any particular country's constitution/charter/mandate.

@HexHammer,

Goshisdead wrote:

Obviously my opinion is better than yours because its the one I believe.

If I walked into a doctor's office and actually believed my opinion about colon cancer, with no medical experience whatsoever, was to be held to a higher esteem than a medical doctor who has had extensive experience with colon cancer patients, I would be an idiot. My opinion is most certainly not equal to his/her, and for good reason! You sincerely disagree with this? You always think your opinions are better simply because they are yours?

I have opinions about our economy, but I most certainly acknowledge that they aren't as educated or well thought out as some economics majors I'm friends with.

I hope we can learn to be humble here...

@Zetherin,

Zetherin;131512 wrote:

That's quite odd for you to feel troubled, considering no one here has claimed that on the basis that someone is disliked they should be forced to leave. Hm. Are you responding to the correct thread?

Are you trying to embarrass me or teach me? Smile

HexHammer; 'it's a real shame that they cant be kept to their own fora, where they belong'
Says to me, 'shut up or get out'. Dunce in the corner. It may not be but sounds alot like segregation, it sounds almost bigoted and 'i am the superior race', 'i am the model and the righteous' 'you are the weak the unworthy' and what i found most troubling was that you agreed with this statement without showing up the inaccuracy, without disagreeing with this what sounds to me like hatred, yes i heard hatred in these words and you agreed with it. I can deal with someones hate, i cant deal with it being agreed with.
Overall this has troubled me becuase it is saying that i am not as good as you, you are better than me, and this elevation is what constitutes a 'good' 'pure' 'better' citizen.
You may be better than me at alot of things this does not make you a better person or a better philosopher, these are my troubles which i did not like to spread, but since you asked.
And if you didn't agree then you were still willing to look the other way.
But i may have misread. Smile

Philosophy Forum

Purge the fools, please!

Quick Links

My Account

able2know