Spirituality subforum

[Fkeu'itan]

Originally Posted by Clarke

Because the existing subforums aren't divided by opinion. They are divided by subject.

Debate is really the only place set side that is specifically divided from the forum by opinions. (At least, it should be... But we all know the situation right now.) Spirituality is is subject just as science, technology, environmentlalism are... Surely, if you're going to claim that it is only opinion-based, then nothing on this forum is 'right' to exist, as *everything* is poinion-based. There is nothing without bias, even of the slightest kind.

Also, I see HNM's point. If you do create a spirituality subforum, and exclude discussions of spirituality from a logical/other perspective, then you are creating a division in the userbase. You are excluding those people who disagree with the premise the subforum is founded on, and I am fairly sure that the validity of that premise is entirely opinion. Excluding people based on their/your opinion, rather than evidence or objectively-followable reasoning, is almost the definition of totalitarianism.

Once again, as we have seen countless times... This is straying into the 'spirituality is all nonsense' subject, which I find personally insulting. Just because it is not logical, does not mean it is a) invalid or b) a school of thought nonetheless. To use an example; Being homosexual is not 'logical', but it still happens, doesn't it? Who is anyone to claim that someone who is gay is 'invalid'.

The creation of a subforum is not about eitism or exclusion, it's simply a place for people of a spiritualist tint to go nd discuss things of a spiritualist nature. Scientists, or people who haven't had experience with spirituality aren't ever *going* to understand, because we work on different terms. Like it or not, we are naturally divided from the scientists of this forum, because we fundamentally operate on different premises. Does not mean we are any better or worse than people who think differently, but also does not mean we are denied the right to ask and answer questions in the domain of spirituality, because it is a part of who we are.

Even if, to you, the questions might not make sense, to spiritualists, they can. Not all the time, i'm sure if this goes ahead, there will even be questions and disagreements between the spiritualists - but there is a large chance that someone spiritual will have had a relatable experience which can help the other person find their way. A 'humanised' relation that science cannot and will not ever provide. Hence why you cannot answer a humanist's question with a scientist's answer.

As I saw comparisons with the science forum earlier, I object: the science subforum is not about philosophy. It is about news of scientific developments. I'm not sure whether the admins would let us use it to discuss philosophy, but "What does development X mean socially/ethically/spiritually?" is certainly a valid question that could be discussed somewhere, if not in the science forum.

Alright then, in that case... We go ahead with the alternate/opposite science forum to allow such discussions to carr on there, too. Just because there are two different forums, does not necessarily mean that the two will become completely separated. There was this thing a long time ago called the 'Debate' forum, where people of opposing views could discuss things and theorise. I think it's still around here somewhere.

*roots around in the 'box'*

Also, Mika, please try to avoid appealing to emotions.

Usually, I support you Mika, but I have to agree... We are speaking up now... There's maybe not much call for an approach like that... (Although I did enjoy the translation of it. )

[Eltu]

Fkeu'itan - not surprisingly, I fully agree with all you said.

Clarke, what about the Environmentalism subforum, then? It's not divided by a subject, but rather a way of looking at things (environmentally). And that sure hasn't created any kind of division in the community.

And we already have the community split up, to an extent - but that doesn't have to be an entirely bad thing. We have the "people who loves books", and "people who aren't that interested in books" - the "people who like to discuss environmental issues", and "people who doesn't like to discuss environmental issues", etc, etc. These kind of "divisions" are something good, since they make us able to pick and choose what we are interested in, and discuss these things easily.

What binds us together is our love for the movie and/or respect for each other. And no spirituality subforum would change that. We'd simply have yet another group of people - "people who are interested in discussing things non-scientifically". Just like with any other subforum, this is defined by interest.

[Clarke]

Originally Posted by Fkeu'itan

This is straying into the 'spirituality is all nonsense' subject, which I find personally insulting.

Why? I don't find your disagreeing with me insulting.

(I've cut out everything else because I really want an answer to that question.)

Originally Posted by Eltu

What binds us together is our love for the movie and/or respect for each other. And no spirituality subforum would change that. We'd simply have yet another group of people - "people who are interested in discussing things non-scientifically". Just like with any other subforum, this is defined by interest.

What about the people who want to discuss non-science scientifically?

[Eltu]

Originally Posted by Clarke

What about the people who want to discuss non-science scientifically?

They have all the other subforums to use - such as the general one, for instance. There will always be subjects that fit into no specific subforum, and that's why we have a general section. Naturally, if there is a high demand for a forum especially dedicated to "discuss non-science scientifically", it can be implemented. But that's irrelevant in this discussion.

[Fkeu'itan]

Originally Posted by Clarke

Why? I don't find your disagreeing with me insulting.

(I've cut out everything else because I really want an answer to that question.)

It's not the disagreement that is insulting me, it's the way you disagree. Telling spiritualists a large part of their lives is just lies induced by the brain and profess to know the 'real' answer is no intelligent debate, that is blatantly saying 'i'm right, you're wrong' - but dressing it in flowery language.

[Aquaplant]

Originally Posted by Fkeu'itan

Spirituality is is subject just as science, technology, environmentlalism are... Surely, if you're going to claim that it is only opinion-based, then nothing on this forum is 'right' to exist, as *everything* is poinion-based. There is nothing without bias, even of the slightest kind.

nope.avi - YouTube

A scientist isn't going to get anywhere by having witty opinions, because science doesn't work that way. Opinions aren't worth anything, only the things you can objectively prove matter, since building upon assumptions makes bad science.

All our opinions are equally meaningless, only the facts matter.

[Eltu]

Aquaplant, I am going to say this once only - I understand your opinions in this matter, but they are not the same for everyone, and in this discussion they are irrelevant. The last time we started discussing this, that thread derailed greatly. You are of course free to talk about this, but please keep it to another thread - this is for discussing the implementation of the subforum only.

[Fkeu'itan]

Originally Posted by Aquaplant

nope.avi - YouTube

A scientist isn't going to get anywhere by having witty opinions, because science doesn't work that way. Opinions aren't worth anything, only the things you can objectively prove matter, since building upon assumptions makes bad science.

All our opinions are equally meaningless, only the facts matter.

But yu are still human, are you not? You are still restricted to a human brain, and a human perception of the world, even with a languages like Mathematics, we still apply it as *humans*. We see in 2d, we exist in 3d. There may be other forms that we cannot ever contemplate with our restrictions,but can make vague allusions to.

I agree actually, assumptions *are* bad science, it is foolish to assume that something is there because somethig else indicates it. But that said, science is entirely built on theories. A set of assumptions.

Anyway... This is not what the thread is about, I don't wish to derail it, nor do I wish to discuss it, as I have done with people many, many times before, to no avail.

[Human No More]

Originally Posted by Fkeu'itan

Honestly, I don't understand what HNM is trying to argue here, with the greatest of respect.

Surely, if subforums create tension and division, then why not have just one big forum titled 'Stuff' that everything would fall into, that way... If someone brought up a book that was also a movie for example, then both coud be discussed with no problems. Well, when it comes down to it, subforums only dictate the context and content of discussion, that way... When someone comes into the book forum to talk about a LoTR book, for example, they know that the topic will be the *book* version, and not the *film* version. To run with the analogy, some people might not like the books, they might find them boring... Which is why they then go to post about the same subject in the film section.

You're being naive.

Subforums are for organisation. The issue HERE is that people wanted one because they did not want to discuss something somewhere else. This shows a big problem, it shows how things have changed over time and not for the better.

Creating it simply promotes the perception that there is a division between 'spiritual' and logical users.
that division, that perception, does not remain within the subforum. It makes its way into every post. THAT will destroy ToS.

Another thing I don't understand is the idea of 'endorsement'... I mean, if we supposedly don't want to be associated with something, that's not really going to happen. This is an Avatar forum... That right away associated us with a film that has strong spiritualist content and a heavy-handed pro-environmentalist message. (If not to you personally, then to the general public as a whole.) And that really defeats the point. Don't forget (as previously mentioned) we also have environmentalist and science and technology subforums... Surely these two things also represent an opinion, even if that opinion does seem one-sided from an outside point of view.[/quote]
I've already said that the environment subforum is an implicit endorsement of a view. Science and technology is not, because that is a thing, not a view.

Right now, I feel what we're communicating is that "we are a solely scientific and pro-environmentalist fan forum" whereas if we introduced something like Spirituality, we would only show our broadness and diversity as a fanbase.

I don't see how - the science and technology subforum is not for only logical views - indeed, there has been a LOT of bashing of logic by a few users.

Naturally, this forum would be a tempting prospect for any spiritualist - myself included - but why shouldn't it be? In recent times, we've felt pushed out and unwanted by our own forum members, let alone our 'family', so of course we're fighting for our right (to party lol) to a place we can all discuss again, like we used to be able to.

In that case, then I fail to see why there can't be a subforum for 'philosophy' or any other variation to cater for people who want 'spiritual' or logical views.

[Clarke]

Originally Posted by Eltu

They have all the other subforums to use - such as the general one, for instance. There will always be subjects that fit into no specific subforum, and that's why we have a general section. Naturally, if there is a high demand for a forum especially dedicated to "discuss non-science scientifically", it can be implemented. But that's irrelevant in this discussion.

But if a subforum covers spirituality, a discussion of spirituality logically goes into that forum. What I object to is a forum discussing spirituality with the explicit or implicit restriction that you must agree with a specific idea (i.e. "spirituality" itself is a unflawed method of thinking) in order to discuss in that forum.

Originally Posted by Fkeu'itan

It's not the disagreement that is insulting me, it's the way you disagree. Telling spiritualists a large part of their lives is just lies induced by the brain and profess to know the 'real' answer is no intelligent debate, that is blatantly saying 'i'm right, you're wrong' - but dressing it in flowery language.

"You are wrong because evidences X, Y and Z disagree with you," appears to me to be relatively non-hostile. I know that most people strip out the second half, but there is a difference between being antagonist and disagreement.

[Human No More]

Originally Posted by Clarke

Because the existing subforums aren't divided by opinion. They are divided by subject.

Also, I see HNM's point. If you do create a spirituality subforum, and exclude discussions of spirituality from a logical/other perspective, then you are creating a division in the userbase. You are excluding those people who disagree with the premise the subforum is founded on, and I am fairly sure that the validity of that premise is entirely opinion. Excluding people based on their/your opinion, rather than evidence or objectively-followable reasoning, is almost the definition of totalitarianism.

As I saw comparisons with the science forum earlier, I object: the science subforum is not about philosophy. It is about news of scientific developments. I'm not sure whether the admins would let us use it to discuss philosophy, but "What does development X mean socially/ethically/spiritually?" is certainly a valid question that could be discussed somewhere, if not in the science forum.

Thank you.

This is the critical difference.

This is why I think that a single subforum, not dedicated to either view, and closely moderated (along with much closer moderation of the 'debate' forum,
would serve the interests of people who want this for organisational purposes. People who want this for a 'safe place', on the other hand, their interests are valid, but creating a special subforum for that is going the wrong way about it, I think, as it will create different camps of users, who become split on differences of how they think, and that WILL be reflected in posts elsewhere. The 'debate' forum does it to a degree.

[Eltu]

Clarke: Again, you are misunderstanding the purpose of the subforum. I'll sum it up for you:

It's a section where users could discuss anything from a non-scientific perspective.

That's it. It's the most wide definition of spiruality there can be, and thus it's the one that should be used considering we all have different views of the thing. Nobody has to agree with anything at all. But just like I couldn't go into the Environmentalism section and say that Earth should be destroyed (since that'd be offtopic), one couldn't go into the Spirituality section and discuss it scientifically. And for one sole reason - it'd be offtopic. That's it. Nothing else.

In response to both you and HNM - I think you are making a far greater deal out of it than it is. People want a subforum for discussing things non-scientifically. People get such a subforum. Ones who are not interested doesn't have to enter, just like with any other subforum.

That's it. There is no "elitism", there is no "banning people who doesn't agree" - there's simply one new subforum for discussing a certain interest (non-scientific conversations).

[Human No More]

Originally Posted by Fkeu'itan

Debate is really the only place set side that is specifically divided from the forum by opinions. (At least, it should be... But we all know the situation right now.) Spirituality is is subject just as science, technology, environmentlalism are... Surely, if you're going to claim that it is only opinion-based, then nothing on this forum is 'right' to exist, as *everything* is poinion-based. There is nothing without bias, even of the slightest kind.

'Debate' is not restricting only people of a single opinion to be allowed to post there.

Once again, as we have seen countless times... This is straying into the 'spirituality is all nonsense' subject, which I find personally insulting. Just because it is not logical, does not mean it is a) invalid or b) a school of thought nonetheless. To use an example; Being homosexual is not 'logical', but it still happens, doesn't it? Who is anyone to claim that someone who is gay is 'invalid'.

You're begging the question.

Nobody here has commented on any view being more or less valid. All I have said is that there is not a need for a dedicated subforum for organisational purposes - indeed, from the viewpoint of organisation, it would make FAR more sense to have a single one for all views, called 'Philosophy' or something.

The creation of a subforum is not about eitism or exclusion, it's simply a place for people of a spiritualist tint to go nd discuss things of a spiritualist nature. Scientists, or people who haven't had experience with spirituality aren't ever *going* to understand, because we work on different terms. Like it or not, we are naturally divided from the scientists of this forum, because we fundamentally operate on different premises. Does not mean we are any better or worse than people who think differently, but also does not mean we are denied the right to ask and answer questions in the domain of spirituality, because it is a part of who we are.

Then do not foster that division, do not make it grow.

http://www.tree-of-souls.com/general...urn_roots.html
The answer is to regain what has been forgotten on ToS, when it didn't matter who someone is.

Even if, to you, the questions might not make sense, to spiritualists, they can. Not all the time, i'm sure if this goes ahead, there will even be questions and disagreements between the spiritualists - but there is a large chance that someone spiritual will have had a relatable experience which can help the other person find their way. A 'humanised' relation that science cannot and will not ever provide. Hence why you cannot answer a humanist's question with a scientist's answer.

Do you even know what a humanist is?

Once again, I do not seek for any such topic to be banned. I can see that people may not want to make a thread in General Discussion, but, honestly, if that's out of fear, rather than out of wishing for a simple organisational one, there are bigger issues here, which a 'safe' subforum will not resolve. That is why if there is one, it should be one for ALL points of view, closely moderated.

Nobody would only add a 'metal' subforum if there was no music subforum - people who liked others would complain.

Alright then, in that case... We go ahead with the alternate/opposite science forum to allow such discussions to carr on there, too. Just because there are two different forums, does not necessarily mean that the two will become completely separated. There was this thing a long time ago called the 'Debate' forum, where people of opposing views could discuss things and theorise. I think it's still around here somewhere.

Yes, not that you'd tell, because the expectation of a 'debate' (AKA argument) has spilled over everywhere. ToS is not a 'debate' forum.
A 'philosophy' subforum would solve any perceived organisational issues, but, what is MORE important here, is to remind everyone of ToS, of the earlier days, when it did not matter who someone was. I made a thread, but it seems to be being ignored.

[Clarke]

Originally Posted by Eltu

It's a section where users could discuss anything from a non-scientific perspective.

It's existence would imply that the admins consider non-scientism (bear with me) to be important enough for its own protected space. Can't you see why HNM objects to this idea?

[Fkeu'itan]

Originally Posted by Human No More

You're being naive.
Subforums are for organisation. The issue HERE is that people wanted one because they did not want to discuss something somewhere else. This shows a big problem, it shows how things have changed over time and not for the better.

I disagree. The reason people here wanted one was because we cannot physically discuss our spirituality in good faith (excuse the expression) without being torn down in a few posts by people telling us we're all liars.

THAT is the thing wrong here. Maybe as spirituaists, we can be hard-headed too but it's difficult (read; nigh-on impossible) to properly convey spiritualism without having felt it at some point and having the ability to empathise.

Creating it simply promotes the perception that there is a division between 'spiritual' and logical users.
that division, that perception, does not remain within the subforum. It makes its way into every post. THAT will destroy ToS.

And you don't think that opression of views and not allowing people their voice without stamping all over their views won't do the same eventually?

Furthermore, let me remind you why AF 'collapsed'. People believed that the 'management' were beginning to become separated from the communtiy, that they stopped listening and began doing only what they wanted, on their terms and morals, despite the calls of many members there who disagreed with a large change. Granted, this is a little different. Over there, Lon was the only real Admin who 'did everything', here we have a few more Mods, but the concept is still the same. It's about losing distance, and becoming a forum based on the admin's ideals of what 'their forum' should be.

All i'm saying is that a large part of your community seem to be crying out, but you don't seem to want to hear it.

Edit: Sorry, and correct me if i'm wrong, but are you saying here that lack of division, acceptance and unity will destroy ToS? BEcause reading it back again... That's what it appears you said.

I've already said that the environment subforum is an implicit endorsement of a view. Science and technology is not, because that is a thing, not a view.

Alright then, if environmentalism is still a view, and an endorsement, then why are you not opposed to that, too? Because you personally agree with environmentalism, but not spirituality?

I don't see how - the science and technology subforum is not for only logical views - indeed, there has been a LOT of bashing of logic by a few users.

Victimisation is really not a good road to go down on this matter. Compared to science-based views, there has been FAR more bashing of spirituality as there has been. The scientists have had pretty much the run of the whole place these past few months, forcing the other side of it into a corner. In some places - off the entire forum.

Just look at all the 'f*ck christianity' posts in the thread of hilarious pics recently... Can you imagine how that would make a christian person feel? Really, it is no different than blaming all the world's ills on the Jews, yet when you say that, you're branded a Nazi or Anti-semite and suddenly, that isn't alright.

In that case, then I fail to see why there can't be a subforum for 'philosophy' or any other variation to cater for people who want 'spiritual' or logical views.

Come on HNM, now you're the one being naieve.

How long do you seriously think a spirtual discussion will be reasonably accepted and upheld in a 'philosophy' forum? You say you dislike the 'Debate' forum, and this really will be no different.

If we're going to g down that route, then there needs to be a lot more acceptance of face-value matters on this forum, as that is really what spirituality functions on. About trust that what you feel is real, and allowing that to guide you. If you automatically believe that the human brain is always wrong and that there is no such thing as a 'heart'or 'soul', then this is already destined to fail before it even begun.