Are you going to miss the Heavy Philosophy section?
I’ll miss the Heavy Philosophy section. The giants roamed there talking in such a pretty manner. I only wish I would have ingaged in such lofty talk more often.
it was kinda obnoxious to assume that only a specific group of people were capable of talking about philosophy. but hey… there should be a place for people to feel better than everyone else.
I disagree, there is a distinct need for a divide between general debate and academic conversation. It’s a far more specialized type of dialogue with an expectation that those participating are already very familiar with the subject matter of the topic.
so in your ideal world every knowledgable person gathers away from the unknowledgable people? how do people learn in your head?
one there is no way of knowing who knows what on this board.
two even if there was a lack of understanding of a philosophers beliefs it doesn’t stunt a readers ability to create unique ideas and contribute to a conversation. see… somehow (it must be magic… or maybe god) humans can read. after they read they can respond!
three… its an internet forum. i read these things nude half the time. there is no prestige. i can filter through messages easily enough. i would assume more learned people would be able to do the same.
four even if it did make it simpler and more controlled and sophisticated… there is a sort of beauty in the chaotic ranting of supposed idiots.
I agree there was a bit of obnoxiousness assuming “only a specific group of people were capable of talking about philosophy” in a serious manner, as cba notes. Why ought the ‘regular’ Philosophy section not assume the same standard as one denoted ‘Heavily Moderated’? It’s having a philosophy forum, and then a second philosophy forum ‘for people who actually know what they’re talking about’. Sorry to say, that’s a blueprint for discrimination and exclusion.
If the suggestion is we ought refrain from making useless, uninformed, or comedic posts in the face of serious inquiry, that should go without saying by way of general forum rules. That is, it’s been my perception since joining, there’s Mundane Babble, The Rant House, and everything else - i.e. everything else warrants serious consideration. Not pointing any fingers, but there is as much lack of ‘serious consideration’ on the part of, dare I say, ‘Legends’, who had the honor of posting in the Heavy-Mod forum, as there is with any noobs or lesser-knowns.
All in all, I’d say the forum was a nice idea, but ultimately unnecessary. The same standards that applied to that forum should apply in general, save those forums not intended for ‘serious’ debate and discussion.
There is something to be said about a place where people can engage in a very specific kind of conversation, for example: How does Locke’s use of the ontology of God allow for a justification of personal property. That’s a pretty dry topic which most people probably wouldn’t give an ass about, if this post were in normal Philosophy section it would quickly fall to the second page due to a lack of interest making it harder to come across by the few who would find that interesting.
In short, all I am saying is that it’s okay to have an more specialized section, it doens’t take away from the philosophy section it only helps catagorize things easier.
Also I don’t think its fair to apply the same rules to Philosophy that were placed on Heavy. There are a lot of great thinkers using this webpage but not all of them have the background to meet demands like well researched.
Is it gone ? Why ? By what causes ? Awww… just when I was hoping I could be granted access…
What will happen to all the threads there ? I hope they’re not lost, I was just beginning to tackle them…
Speaking about this… hey, I’ve just noticed a few more emoticons on my left side of the screen… Well I never… merry Christmas to you too, Ben…
Now, seriously, I’m awfully sorry that the heavy moderated philosophy forum is gone… for I feel that a great injustice has been made. Segregating the “stronger” philosophers on the board by the ones who are yet in the process of learning wasn’t at all a bad or obnoxious idea - it was actually worthy of all the applause. Every new-comer had something to look ahead for, it gave a heavier meaning to all the discussions - it was the higher sphere that all of us should hanker towards. I fancied the idea that there is always something to aspire to, thus impelling me to weigh my words out consistently before posting them. I have never found that constituting a hierarchy is something condemnable - on the contrary, it stimulates competition, which is the foundation of progress.
I can’t believe that on a board where Nietzsche is the most quoted author, an impenitence like this could have met such a weak resistence. Isn’t the Heavy Philosophy forum the bulwark that all want to take hold of, the very condition of the true philosopher: a desire to exceed what you have already accomplished, to outrun your own assumed condition, in a battle for continuously perfecting yourself ? Isn’t Nietzsche the one who invited us to dans, by abjuring the weights of preconceived thoughts, wasn’t he who exhorted the spirit to a never ending evolution ?..
Alas, then… Shame to those who see auspiciousness in the new setting - I say it is a portent ! For only the small intelectual bourgeoisie indulges itself in the quiescence of thought !..
I say bring back the Heavily Moderated Philosophy Forum, so that everyone might regain the sense of measure, given by the feeling that one can never rest on his laurels.
Bring it back, bring it back…
I have to agree whole heartedly with Mucius Scevola. The HM board, while infrequently used, really did provide a benchmark for philosophical discussion probably unparalleled on the web. Please bring it back Ben.
coming soon to an ILP board near you… Symposia…
-Imp
Hey folks,
Thanks for your concern on this, I’ll try to explain a little bit of the history around the HM forum. I think what is clear is that there will always be those who think it was a good idea, and those who didn’t.
The HM forum was borne out of many members frustration that the discussion in the main Philosophy forum was elementary and being hijacked by newbies and ignorami. So as a result of this, we created the HM forum where only certain people could post. It started off ok but soon no-one really posted in there and it often lies stagnant.
However, I think it served its purpose in that, no-one complains about the main Philosophy forum anymore! Or at least not that I know of. It seems to have pushed up the quality of debate in the Phil forum because people wanted to prove themselves and also were disgruntled by the very concept of the ‘elite’ HM forum.
A few weeks ago it was put forward to get rid of the HM forum or change its nature. A lot of members agreed and so I’ve hidden it from public view until a decision can be made. The discussions are not lost they are just not publically viewable. Maybe this thread will come up with some new ideas. Also, as Impenitent says, Symposia is on the way and it may provide the answer.
All the best,
Ben
Lessons to be learnt from Her Majesty’s Philosophy forum:
Take your time, a rushed response is a lot more likely to be unnecessarily combative and obstructive
Read about topics before posting about them - you are more likely to attract the higher quality posters to your thread if you give them something on which to chew
Try to provide evidence and text where you can - it’s always handy to have some of the actual words of the books being discussed, and personal life experience is almost invariably interesting to others
Neglect something and you lose it (or have it subverted into something else)
ignorami!
I love that!
Anyway, it’s not gone just hidden.
Well said. Point taken.
Frankly I think it smacked of pretentiousness and would be glad to see it go. On another website forum I had a perfectly reasonable and non-offensive thread (asking about parallels between Stoicism and Taoism) deleted by a moderator who “thought I could do better” academically - as if I were part of his class or as if I were getting paid for this. I had no interest in putting in the work of writing a post if it would be deleted arbitrarily simply because the moderator didn’t care for it (something I’ve never experienced on any type of forum before or since). After pointing out a few specific examples of less formal posts that generated great conversations, I left and came to ilovephilosophy.com, where things have been much more fruitful.
But ever since coming here I have never ventured into the “formal” philosophy board. Although I love learning and reading technical philosophy myself, I have no interest in trying to impress by slinging technical jargon about and name dropping. That isn’t thinking and it isn’t philosophy.
Philosophy is meant to be lived and exercised – not regurgitated from whatever bits ad authors we’re proud enough to have read. If ordinary people can’t understand it, participate in it, and use it to their benefit in life, then it is worthless in my view.
In fact, one of the most difficult challenges I have been trying to meet in recent years, is to develop the ability to communicate philosophic concepts using plain language that is easily understandable. It is one of the hardest things I’ve encountered in philosophy and an ability I respect greatly in professional philosophers, perhaps more than anything.
Where successful, it seems to be very helpful and enlightening. Much more so than the common alternatives of either looking like an elitist jerk, talking over people’s heads for our own emotional gratification, or being too socially inept and clueless to know that others are finding us tedious and boring.
Despite my above post, I agree that Someemofag has a good point with his example. It is a shame if someone’s post doesn’t appeal enough to get any action before like-minded folks see it. But how then to deal with the lack of activity in the HP forum?
One thing I might ask:
Is it so terrible if a forum has low participation? Are you guys selling ads in there, which rates are affected for? Are you being charged by the number of forums from the host?
If there is no negative aspect to having one of the forums at low activity, maybe it would be ok to just leave it. But I still tend to think it represents a lesser aspect of philosophy’s higher purpose, and tends to look pretentious. If anything, such discussion is often more ‘intellectual trivia’ and ‘minutia’ than philosophy. Still, such a forum doesn’t hurt me any 
THe HM forum did a lot more to damage our solidarity here at ILP then it ever did to help develop it. At best everyone had mixed feelings about it. It was an interesting experience that never produced anything near the results that people hope it might create. It failed to accomplish the goal of creating an atmosphere that promoted more richly developed discourse. Resentment for being excluded was its most common and lasting impact.
What exactly were the restrictions of HM. Anyone could post if it was well researched and wasn’t simply a rant, right? I don’t see a problem with having a post rejected because it didn’t fit the requirments. If the author of the rejected post doesn’t feel he should have to change the original post then he could always post in the regular forum.
Regarding the feelings of resentment due to the supposed elitist or pretentious nature of HM. Let me just say this…
Philosophy is amazing. Anyone can participate! However Philosophy also is a very specific and acedemic practice. This is why people can get a Doctors in Philosophy.
At this point this specialization in philosophy is not unlike a specialist in any other field: biology, dentistry, enginering, cooking. Would you really expect people of this level to want debate rudimentary concepts?
Greetings Someemofag
I’m guessing the above paragraph was a response to my first post in this thread, recalling my experience at another website. You may have missed that bit of information, as it sounds like you think I was complaining about requirements of the HM here, a forum here which I have never visited.
However, I think those requirements are reasonable if one is to have such a forum to begin with. My further comments were about whether or not such a forum is a good idea to begin with.
(As for the other website where I came from, it was not such a distinct forum, but rather a unified and general philosophy forum. This particular moderator simply had a god-complex. But this experience was a digression I probably should have not included in my post.)