Philosophy and Philosophizing

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Periodically, an ILP member will bemoan that absence of any serious philosophical discourse in the various forums. The complaints are usually accompanied by derisive comments about “philosophizing” and the “lesser” quality of minds that fail to adhere to PHILOSOPHY.

Academic philosophy is a rigorous, disciplined use of reason in human inquiry. It demands adhering to a strict set of rules replete with carefully defined language and concepts. Much like a game of chess, all of the game ‘pieces’ carry specific roles and moves. To play the game of academic philosophy requires vast knowledge of all potential game pieces as well as genius capability to arrange those pieces. The object is to win.

Philosophizing is a different game - one played with few rules, and is more about opinion than carefully constructed logical presentation. Philosophizing may appeal to reason, but not in the rigorous disciplined formal logic of academic philosophy. The typical test of philosophizing is just ‘reasonableness’, or common sensing. It ain’t PHILOSOPHY. Philosophizing is asking WTF questions and and getting “In my opinion,” answers.

ILP recognizes both approaches to human inquiry. This is why there are two philosophy forums: Philosophy, (heavy duty philosophizing) and Philosophy - heavily moderated (for PHILOSOPHY)

I find it curious that some of the members who complain about the lack of PHILOSOPHY rarely, and for some, never post in Philosophy - heavily moderated. Next to the IRC chat room, Philosophy - heavily moderated is the least utilized of all forums. What does this say about those who loudly complain ?

For those who are frustrated with the lack of PHILOSOPHY, the appropriate venue is right in front of you. Use it.

JT

2

The rules and guidelines sticky mentions that the HEAVILY MODERATED board is restricted access, is this still the case? This is what puts me off posting there.

3

Hi oreso,

Yes. Just PM Ben and ask for access.

JT

4

Philosophy Heavy Moderated exists mostly for old thread that have run there course and as a way of highlighting some of our better discussions. At one point we where thinking of calling it, ILP Classics, yet also wanted somewhere for college students to discuss course work, while not just asking for answers to their homework.

It’s true you do need permission to post this is only so it doesn’t turn into the main Philosophy forum. E.g. “Oh, I want to be taken as a serious philosopher so I’ll post in PHM not the normal section as I’ll get a better response.” While it does seem elitist, the only requirement is that you take philosophy seriously enough to read its works. There are many classical texts on philosophy and not enough members of the site are reading them. This forum is so those that read the works have a place to discuss them without being interrupted by those who haven’t.

What do you have to do to get access to PHM??? ASK!!! It’s not difficult send me a PM asking for access. So far I’ve only said no to two people, because they were new members. Though, they were given the option to write a reply to one of the topics PMed to me or wait a couple of months so we got to know them.

Once people have access, there’s only one requirement, keep the level of replies pertinent & serious. If not, after a couple of warnings you’ll lose your posting ability.

To those who think Elitist Bastards that’s fair enough, but we simply don’t have enough moderators to do the job any other way. By keeping the number of replies to a minimum & from people who are willing to abide by the rules it becomes easier to manage.

5

I’ve made this a Sticky topic for the moment.

6

Hi All!

I think, JT, in your opening discussion you failed to point out that there is another very significant philosophical avenue, in addition to the two you mention, and that is the avenue of practical philosophy, i.e., moral practise, living, in other words, as a philosopher, as opposed to talking about it.

Of course, one recognises that in a virtual communication zone such as this one we are in it is impossible demonstrate this branch of philosophy, we can but talk of it, nevertheless, we need to be aware, I believe, that it, perhaps more than any other avenue, is really what philosophy is all about in the final analysis, i.e., living as a good and excellent human being.

No?

peter

7

depends on your preference, phrygianslave!! for me, it’s all about existentialism…

speaking of which: do you think philosophical ideas always have to be rationally justified in order to be acceptable?

8

Sad, when a moderator has to use his “office” of Moderator to passive-aggressively muse upon the behavior of specific posters, to only further enhance his own opinion of himself as once again “wise”, and notify us of his confused but “sticky” understanding of the chasm between researched and rigorous “Philosophy” and what-the-f*ck opinion. Interesting. :slight_smile:

Dunamis

9

ooh! ouch! get those claws back in, baby!

:wink:

10

Hi PW,

Yes of course. The talking about isn’t the practice. The questions and opinions we find in the forum are about looking for those insights into ourselves that would lead us to greater awareness of our practice. All too often, we forget the distinction between knowledge and knowing. It is very easy to get lost in the words…….

Dunamis,

Please remember that even though I am a member of ILP staff, I am also a member at large in this community. The thread has nothing to do with my staff position.

“passive-aggressively muse upon the behaviors of specific posters,….” The only specificity of posters are those who have, are, and will register complaints about the lack of “researched and rigorous philosophy”
Any member who has been here for very long knows that Philosophy - heavily moderated was created just for those “specific” members. Passive-aggressively? That is your opinion.

“further enhance his own opinion of himself as once again “wise”, and notify us of his confused but “sticky” understanding of the chasm between researched and rigorous “Philosophy” and what-the-f*ck opinion.” Again, your opinion.

Your willingness to read into my posting of this thread, and to find nothing but ill intent on my part is noted. You have said absolutely nothing about me, and everything about yourself.

JT

11

What I find interesting is that what is often called ‘philosophy’, by some, is the constant repeating of other people’s viewpoints and the incessant posturing within pre-existing perspectives; a battle of who understood and interpreted so-and-so the best or who can display knowledge concerning philosophical terminology and tradition and place himself within it, more effectively.
In essence what is termed ‘philosophy’, as it occurs in such on-line Forum’s is a comparison of knowledge rather than of awareness.

We can imagine a competent philosophy professor being able to recite verbatim philosophical viewpoints and show a prowess in using the correct technical terms, but can we truly call him a philosopher?
If we participate in a conversation with such an academic and all he tells us is what particular individuals, through time, have said and with whom he agrees with, are we hearing his mind expressing itself or does he become a knowledge receptacle, dispensing information with no personal insight except in agreement or disagreement?

The word ‘philosopher’ simply denotes a friend of wisdom. It does not specify a source nor does it limit the method by which this wisdom will be approached or how one acquaints oneself with it.
It is obvious that the need to know what others have said and to use their concepts, for the sake of efficiency, provides a necessary focal point all sides can reference and position themselves in relation to. It is also obvious why we often feel the need to support our positions by referencing other famous minds with which we agree or have been inspired and influenced by, but to take this referencing and name-dropping as evidence of a deeper understanding is foolish.
One need not read philosophy to be a philosopher nor is wisdom the restricted domain of the educated and informed. All one needs to be a philosopher is a keen and ordered mind, an incessant curiosity and the ability to construct arguments supporting viewpoints.

Knowing what Nietzsche wrote or how Kant deconstructed reason, might be helpful in saving time and mental effort and it may provide common ground to inter-relate and position ourselves with, but it is not necessary.

The simple fact is that much of the past’s knowledge permeates within the present and one can access knowledge through indirect methods concerning specific philosophical schools of thought. We need not know Marx to have some understanding of what he wrote and believed.
True, reading a source directly provides the mind with the exercise of interpretation and it avoids any errors that might happen through someone else’s interpretations of said source, but directly engaging reality and constructing our own, personal, interpretations of what we experience and perceive and then using others as a sounding board and a comparison is a far more better mental exercise.

I would submit that what goes for philosophy, even in the presumptuous {heavily moderated} board, is nothing more than a competition of who has read the most and who has interpreted what he has read the best.
If I wanted to know what Hume believed I will read Hume and if I wanted to know what Sartre thought, I’ll read Sartre, I need not come hear and listen to what another has understood or how another interpreted Hume and Sartre.
These forums are important in that they provide an arena for personal, PERSONAL, opinions based on personal experiences where we can then reference some other in support of or in opposition to our perceptions.

If we come here to display knowledge then what are we really here for?
And how easy it is to display knowledge here, where the immediacy of face-to-face exchanges eliminates time restrictions and where we can open books and read through another’s analysis beforehand and present it as our own.

12

Tent.

Your willingness to read into my posting of this thread, and to find nothing but ill intent on my part is noted. You have said absolutely nothing about me, and everything about yourself.

Please inform our glorious readers the purpose and intent of this sentence of yours:

“What does this say about those who loudly complain?”

In fact, your post was a typical ILP post – a potentially interesting point made the excuse for the attack of others. That it was made by a “staff” member who likes to see himself as a spiritual elite, and then made “sticky” is only all the more pathetic.

If you were actually making a point about the reasons why “serious” people do not post in the Heavy Mod section, it might serve you to actually look at the Heavy Mod section – it is a wasteland. (Pangloss makes an possibly interesting and researched point and then waits 9 months in vain for a response of any kind.) The reason people do not post there is not because they have some inherent character flaw which you in all your wisdom have uncovered, but because the section sucks and needs to be completely overhauled or be done away with altogether. People who don’t post there don’t post there because they are not stupid enough to post there. If you had even a modicum of appreciation for the situation, and not the – as usual – agenda of placing yourself above others in all your humility, you would realize this.

It is quite clear that what concerns you is neither the quality of posts on this site, nor the hope of discussing ideas, nor the actual status of the Heavy Mod section, but rather your own desire to impune the intents of others to your own self-preening.

Dunamis

13

Cheers for Satyr.

Do we want to understand or do we wish to be more emphatic about what we believe we know to hide the fact that we lack the capacity for understanding and human perspective philosophy indicates is possible?

14

Dunamis,

My statement suggested that those who complain about the lack of “researched and rigorous” philosophy were simply complaining to complain. This is obvious when the venue they seek is in front of them. You describe Philosophy - heavily moderated as a “wasteland” and that the reason people don’t post there is because they’re not stupid enough to post there. Apparently, the 58 people who have posted there (59 including Pangloss) since 2004 are stupid enough to post there - some of them multiple times, people like Magius, Marshal McDaniel, Pax Vitae, Polymarchus, Mathew E, and others.

If you would take a moment to read the thread, you would notice that I was not the the person who “stickied” the thread. That was done by Pax.

You have set yourself up as the knowing arbiter of both what is right and good in ILP. You continue to ‘know’ all about my intent as a member of this community. Again, you say nothing about anyone but yourself.

JT

15

Tent.,

Apparently, the 58 people who have posted there (59 including Pangloss) since 2004 are stupid enough to post there - some of them multiple times, people like Magius, Marshal McDaniel, Pax Vitae, Polymarchus, Mathew E, and others.

As usual, you have no comprehension that you are arguing against yourself. Of these 58 people since 2004, hmm nearly two years worth, how many have posted in say the last 6 months? Tell me? Have any of these brilliant people decided to continue posting there?

The reason why people post on a forum is to get interaction, not to post theses and leave them.

What you miss in your simple-minded dichotomy of "what-the-fck" questions and rigorously researched philosophy is that people like to ask what-the-fck questions about rigorous Philosophy – this is exactly the kind of thing that the Heavy Mod section is useless for. In fact it is now useless for anything other than inspiring newbies to hope to “belong”, newbies that gawk at the “serious” title, but haven’t looked closely enough to see that the last posted dates of the material are ancient history. It is dried up and dead and anyone around here knows it - that is anyone but you. I don’t care who posted on it in March 2004.

That you imply that those that do not recourse themselves to such a barren landscape are somehow naturally complainers is only to brighten your plumage. When I came to this site I was denied access to the Heavy Mod section. When I read its posts I realized nothing of interest was going on there anyways, so I stopped looking at it altogether. I’m sure most people feel the same. It is a meaningless prop, devoid of contribution or even interest, except in name only.

That your veiled attack on the intents of others was “sticky’d” by Pax, whose penchant for ludicrously locking threads (with CAPS monologue conclusions - see the silly M.B. locking of “An apology…”) only exceeds your own insecurities, is solely due to your “moderator” status. Otherwise your “observations” of others would have been quietly moved to Mundane Babble by Imp, and relegated to oblivion, such as it probably deserved.

That you champion the relevance of postings in Heavy Mod over a year old, the postings of people who no longer post at ILP at all is more than a hint to your disconnect.

You have set yourself up as the knowing arbiter of both what is right and good in ILP.

I have “set myself up” as nothing. It was not me that accepted to be a moderator. I shoot straight from the hip – and may inadvertently voice some for those silent ones who cannot take on the High and Mighty – yet infinitely humble – Tentative.

Oh Wise One, you have so much to teach us.

Dunamis

16

Hello F(r)iends,

Why post in the Heavily Moderated (HM) forum? What possible harm can there be in posting something in the “regular” Philosophy forum? It seems clearly evident that posting in the HM Philosophy forum is like posting in a desert…

Sometimes the less philosophically inclined ask the best questions regarding the “Philosophy - heavily moderated (for PHILOSOPHY)” forum. More importantly, perhaps it is the less serious philosopher that needs exposure/access to the serious philosophy… It could help breed the new wave of thinkers/contributors at ILP.

Tentative, your post did come off a little like a “complain about the complaints” post… C’est la vie, no?

-Thirst

17

T4M,

I agree, and I would hope that our ‘serious’ philosophers would continue to post in the philosophy forum. That said, it would be great if everyone would remember that the full range of beginners to veterans will post to any or all threads there. If the veteran members become disgrundled at the ‘quality’ of posts to their threads, then they can turn the heavily moderated forum into an oasis of their liking.

The point of this thread is not about the success or failure of any forum, but that it is what we make it, whether that is philosophy or the heavily moderated forum. The venues are there for those who would use them. To bitch and moan about a desert misses the point. Create what you want. The tools are there.

A complaint about complaining? Well, for those who wish to see it that way. Somehow, I thought it was pointing out that those who complained simply weren’t using the tools available…

Dunamis,

Please feel free to continue your rant. Whatever you say, have it your way. It is seen for what it is.

JT

18

Hi JT & all!

The latter part of this remark of Dunamis’ rings very true!

peter

19

lol, did you even read my first post, or did you just start a rant??? PHM is about old topics which we though had merit! I wish I knew how to write slowly so you might get what I’m trying to say. O L D T O I C S, Oops, I’ve used caps! The reason we did this is very few people read beyond the 3 page of the main philosophy forum. There are some interesting old threads around, but we tried to kill to birds with one stone. Archive + Discussion of Classic philosophy. Everybody then reacts and thinks Elitist!!! Elitist!!! Okay one last time! We don’t have enough mods to do Heavily Mod’ed any other way. But I’ll come back to this point in my next reply.

Dunamis, you seem very upset, why??? Want have we done to piss you off?

So, is that the attitude you have when reading Plato, Kant, Schopenhauer or Russell??? “It’s more then 2 days old, I’m not interested in out of date thinking!” :stuck_out_tongue:

The truth about PHM is something like only 5 posts have been placed there since it was created. Nobody wants to talk about the classics! No one is interested in a more academically structured approach to philosophically texts. You can shot the shit with normal philosophy all you want in the main section, but we don’t want any distractions in PHM. Why do you have a problem with this?

20

[size=150]What could we do to make the PHM section better???

Simple question, lets here it.[/size]