A different kind of discussing philosophy of religion

wynn

˙
Valued Senior Member
A different kind of discussing philosophy of religion:

The Prosblogion
http://prosblogion.ektopos.com/


What do you think?

What are the pros and cons of discussing philosophy of religion as done at the Prosblogion, in comparison to how it is done at Sciforums?
 
No takers?

Could someone at least tell me why they didn't reply to the topic question?
 
No takers?

Could someone at least tell me why they didn't reply to the topic question?

In a word. TLTR.

I find that most want a quick and dirty read that they respond to in a quick and dirty way. People do not seem to have the patience now a days for a long drawn out debate. A few years ago you might have gotten some takers but people today do not seem to have the attention span to handle more than one or two quick ideas in a post and whenever I put even just a bit two much in, even if it has a few quick links and is not long, I seem to loose their focus.

People seem more interested in throwing their two cents in, praise you or curse you and get out quick. No one seems to be seeking answers and are only wanting to hear themselves talk or having their POV confirmed.

A rather pathetic situation all around in what is turning into a tower of Babel even with people speaking the same language. These boards do not seem to be a good place at all to change anyone's mind about anything and people do not seem to know when they are on the losing side of a debate and just keep talking to the air. I can count on one hand how many times I have actually seen someone change their minds and I get around a fair bit. That and people seem to have their issue niche, if I can call it that, where they tend to only speak to what they already have a firm position on and there is usually no way in hell that they will switch.

I have placed the odd post that asks why people are in these forums.
Preach, teach, learn or what. Almost no one says to learn and this tells me that almost all here have their opinions fixed and just want confirmation for their paradigms. I guess you might call these places placeboes for their egos.

I came into the net from a life of rather good debate success in the real world and my experience here tells me that no amount of skill, mine or of other bright guys out there, seem to faze those they go against because as I say, people either do not recognize or care when they have lost a debate or are just to stupid to recognize when they have lost. You will also note that they almost never answer direct questions or show their own morals and will just quote others or sidetrack. I have one particular thing on the morals of hell that I ask anyone who speaks to that topic and no bull, out of the hundreds that I have asked over time, perhaps 3 have actually spoken to it. The people out here are rather pathetic.

Now I am getting TLTR. Too long to read.

Regards
DL
 
Heh. Thanks, DL.

The more I read the educated discussions on religion, the less interest I have in Sci.
Although I am still puzzled by the confidence of some posters here.
 
Heh. Thanks, DL.

The more I read the educated discussions on religion, the less interest I have in Sci.
Although I am still puzzled by the confidence of some posters here.

Most, believer and non-believer, are just as fundamentally locked into their thinking patterns as fundamentals. Most believe their own B S to be true.

I would imagine that even you and I fall into this locked mind syndrome.
It is quite normal. What is not normal is to reject intelligent information and remain stupid in a given area. If I wanted to change your mind about anything then I imagine I would have to work quite hard. Visa versa.
That is why the net is a Tower of Babble.

Regards
DL
 
I wouldn't be so quick to judge people.

It's not clear what "intelligent information" is, to begin with.

Secondly, people have a real need to talk, to communicate.
If we go with the thrust of your reasoning, then people should mostly be silent, go to the proverbial "corner in the back" and only come out when they are (close to) perfect. This is not realistic, and I think causes more guilt, shame and overall harm than even fundamentalist fights.
 
Communication is both speaking and listening.
We follow our bliss in deciding what to do and when to do it.

Regards
DL
 
Back
Top