Philosophy Now Forum

I can't read 95% of the lounge, some threads 100%, as I've had to foe 80% of the contributors. The Center for Inquiry has the same problem, with marginally better quality.

How long before Philosophy Now has to abandon the Forum as has Richard Dawkins?

What a strange post! Have you come here to get the Phorum cancelled, Martin?

mickthinks wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 11:37 am What a strange post! Have you come here to get the Phorum cancelled, Martin?

Strange in what way to you mickthinks?

I'd advise it on the basis of the extremely low average quality of the posts I've seen so far, yes. Particularly The Lounge, but also other 'rooms'.

You?

freedom of speech leads to discernment...

-Imp

Impenitent wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 12:53 pm freedom of speech leads to discernment...

-Imp

Yairse... so it does.

Free speech for the many always degenerates to free speech for the few with little to say.

Are there any subscription only fora?

they had thought about that for here (bot battles ect.) but I think the open forum draws a few more eyes to the magazine...

-Imp

Imagine what it must be like to be so egotistical self-centred, so sure of "yourself", and so closed that you believe that you 'had to' to stop listening to and conversing with any one who did not have and follow the same views and beliefs as "ones" 'self'.

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 11:20 am I can't read 95% of the lounge, some threads 100%, as I've had to foe 80% of the contributors. The Center for Inquiry has the same problem, with marginally better quality.

How long before Philosophy Now has to abandon the Forum as has Richard Dawkins?

I believe that this site has a sponsor for a virtual home for the criminally insane.

Some passerby's stop by believing that it is just a zoo, and they have a spot of fun.

And lastly, an occasional researcher just wants to run some testing.

It is multifunctional.
When Socrates was asked why he married the meanest woman in Athens, he told a parable about horses. One learns to be good at it by starting with the wild ones.

Every thing can be put to some use. For example, printed versions of what is on here can be used to make punk Origami.

Seriously, though, I tried to open up a dialog with the person who runs this site, turn it into a real philosophy forum, by he said he was not interested, i.e., a typical corporate mentality, cash first, all other concerns secondary, or non-existent.

Personally, I believe in what Plato stated. The job of a philosopher was Dialectic, which he defined as binary information processing as applied to human behavior, what Confucius called the Superior Man, One can say, Homo Superior: a type of human outlined in the Bible, a human that is mentally functional. If I were not a poor man, I would fund such a forum myself.

If you paraphrase a quote of Xenophon of Socrates, A standard of human behavior recognized by all mankind would put an end to the division of humanity, which is exactly the same point made by the Bible, and rationally, by biological fact.

I was once asked to express that standard, and I do. Now it only remains to show how to apply it. By our own hand we can learn to become rational.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:14 pm

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 11:20 am I can't read 95% of the lounge, some threads 100%, as I've had to foe 80% of the contributors. The Center for Inquiry has the same problem, with marginally better quality.

How long before Philosophy Now has to abandon the Forum as has Richard Dawkins?

I believe that this site has a sponsor for a virtual home for the criminally insane.

Some passerby's stop by believing that it is just a zoo, and they have a spot of fun.

And lastly, an occasional researcher just wants to run some testing.

It is multifunctional.
When Socrates was asked why he married the meanest woman in Athens, he told a parable about horses. One learns to be good at it by starting with the wild ones.

Every thing can be put to some use. For example, printed versions of what is on here can be used to make punk Origami.

Seriously, though, I tried to open up a dialog with the person who runs this site, turn it into a real philosophy forum, by he said he was not interested, i.e., a typical corporate mentality, cash first, all other concerns secondary, or non-existent.

Personally, I believe in what Plato stated. The job of a philosopher was Dialectic, which he defined as binary information processing as applied to human behavior, what Confucius called the Superior Man, One can say, Homo Superior: a type of human outlined in the Bible, a human that is mentally functional. If I were not a poor man, I would fund such a forum myself.

If you paraphrase a quote of Xenophon of Socrates, A standard of human behavior recognized by all mankind would put an end to the division of humanity, which is exactly the same point made by the Bible, and rationally, by biological fact.

I was once asked to express that standard, and I do. Now it only remains to show how to apply it. By our own hand we can learn to become rational.

Not bad Phil8659. Makes me wonder why I foed you?

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 9:09 pm

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:14 pm

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 11:20 am I can't read 95% of the lounge, some threads 100%, as I've had to foe 80% of the contributors. The Center for Inquiry has the same problem, with marginally better quality.

How long before Philosophy Now has to abandon the Forum as has Richard Dawkins?

I believe that this site has a sponsor for a virtual home for the criminally insane.

Some passerby's stop by believing that it is just a zoo, and they have a spot of fun.

And lastly, an occasional researcher just wants to run some testing.

It is multifunctional.
When Socrates was asked why he married the meanest woman in Athens, he told a parable about horses. One learns to be good at it by starting with the wild ones.

Every thing can be put to some use. For example, printed versions of what is on here can be used to make punk Origami.

Seriously, though, I tried to open up a dialog with the person who runs this site, turn it into a real philosophy forum, by he said he was not interested, i.e., a typical corporate mentality, cash first, all other concerns secondary, or non-existent.

Personally, I believe in what Plato stated. The job of a philosopher was Dialectic, which he defined as binary information processing as applied to human behavior, what Confucius called the Superior Man, One can say, Homo Superior: a type of human outlined in the Bible, a human that is mentally functional. If I were not a poor man, I would fund such a forum myself.

If you paraphrase a quote of Xenophon of Socrates, A standard of human behavior recognized by all mankind would put an end to the division of humanity, which is exactly the same point made by the Bible, and rationally, by biological fact.

I was once asked to express that standard, and I do. Now it only remains to show how to apply it. By our own hand we can learn to become rational.

Not bad Phil8659. Makes me wonder why I foed you?

Maybe because you assume my intentions.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 9:40 pm

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 9:09 pm

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:14 pm

I believe that this site has a sponsor for a virtual home for the criminally insane.

Some passerby's stop by believing that it is just a zoo, and they have a spot of fun.

And lastly, an occasional researcher just wants to run some testing.

It is multifunctional.
When Socrates was asked why he married the meanest woman in Athens, he told a parable about horses. One learns to be good at it by starting with the wild ones.

Every thing can be put to some use. For example, printed versions of what is on here can be used to make punk Origami.

Seriously, though, I tried to open up a dialog with the person who runs this site, turn it into a real philosophy forum, by he said he was not interested, i.e., a typical corporate mentality, cash first, all other concerns secondary, or non-existent.

Personally, I believe in what Plato stated. The job of a philosopher was Dialectic, which he defined as binary information processing as applied to human behavior, what Confucius called the Superior Man, One can say, Homo Superior: a type of human outlined in the Bible, a human that is mentally functional. If I were not a poor man, I would fund such a forum myself.

If you paraphrase a quote of Xenophon of Socrates, A standard of human behavior recognized by all mankind would put an end to the division of humanity, which is exactly the same point made by the Bible, and rationally, by biological fact.

I was once asked to express that standard, and I do. Now it only remains to show how to apply it. By our own hand we can learn to become rational.

Not bad Phil8659. Makes me wonder why I foed you?

Maybe because you assume my intentions.

More likely that I didn't like your tone, Sir. But not in the above.

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 10:08 pm

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 9:40 pm

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 9:09 pm

Not bad Phil8659. Makes me wonder why I foed you?

Maybe because you assume my intentions.

More likely that I didn't like your tone, Sir. But not in the above.

You have never realized that in any written environment, it is the reader, not the writer, that sets the tone. There was one important founder of our country that realized this, and he actually hired a person to read things for him in a monotone so as to not infer his own prejudices. Take another example, Genesis in the Bible, there are actually 3 stories of creation, one looks good, one looks bad, and the third, neither.
Judge not by appearance by by rightful judgment.
Words, names, in of themselves have no meaning. One can either adhere to a convention of purpose of grammar, or not.
The whole world is my foe, and always has been. That is what drives evolution.

When I was a child, I called it subjective identification with reality, and asked about it in a lucid dream-state. The answer I got, was a sudden blinding light, so bright, I could not even close my eyes to block it out, the light gradually dimmed, and then I could see a field of flowers.
Maybe you can see the answer in the metaphor, as I did.

If you have a hard time with the metaphor, have you ever been snow blind? It works both ways.
Plato put the same metaphor in the Allegory of the Cave, and you may know how much bull-shit ideas that spawned.

Apply it to the perceptible and intelligible, whose voice do you listen to most? It then often becomes painful to learn how to listen to someone else.

Apply it to evolution. You know what is happening now, all the time, it makes it hard to listen so that you know where history is going.;

Self-control. Both Plato and the Bible tells us how to master snow blindness, or near sightedness, the art of mensuration, which geometry does perfectly.

Martin Peter Clarke wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 11:20 am I can't read 95% of the lounge, some threads 100%, as I've had to foe 80% of the contributors. The Center for Inquiry has the same problem, with marginally better quality.

How long before Philosophy Now has to abandon the Forum as has Richard Dawkins?

At any rate blocking people for their so called "tone" something which you overlay upon their words, means, you are just as bad as the rest of them, not nearly as bright as you imagine yourself to be.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:14 pm

... this site has a sponsor for a virtual home for the criminally insane.

Are you revealing more here than you intended?

accelafine wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 11:42 pm

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 24, 2025 8:14 pm

... this site has a sponsor for a virtual home for the criminally insane.

Are you revealing more here than you intended?

Absolutely not. I did intend a reference to you, so do not feel left out.
And I apologize that the poison I brought did not satisfy you. I will diligently work on another batch.