ThoughtFox,

It's a bit amusing reading these comments, especially about Hypersonic. I suppose he was always a little beligerent (bless his soul) and short with people, but I never got the 'top dog' attitude from him. I don't doubt your experiences with him, though.

The spats and internet-animosity, at least what I remember, were rarely philosophical in nature -- usually political. But, for sure, there were cases where you just didn't like another member's character. I usually annoyed people on both fronts, which was nice. I think I missed the 2009-10 period. TD, Hypersonic, Timeline, and Leo are names more familiar to me. I cannot call Timeline a philosophy person. If pressed, I'll concede she is sentient. But that's it! Leo lives in another dimension, where logic and grammar don't exist, but you can buy a double scoop of haiku ice-cream on every corner. Let me not say anything about TD. Hyper, though, was a good member here. Yeah, he could be a jerk, but he was at least a worthwhile jerk to read. Honestly, I liked the guy and didn't think him a jerk, but then we had a different relationship than he had with you non-clique-beloning others. No offense.

But back to this topic (whatever exactly it is). This place has enough (I'm guessing now) members to be of service to noobs. I mean, if you don't have any academic background in philosophy from a good institution, or aren't naturally gifted (nobody here is THAT gifted), then your skill level (believe it or not) is going to be rather remedial. That's what people don't get. They come in thinking they're pretty good thinkers, pretty smart guys (usually the smartest or more serious thinkers in their circle of friends and family), so they (quite naturally, I suppose) think their reasoning is as good as anyone else's. Wrong.

I think the best advice for people hoping to benefit from coming here is to come here without the arrogance. By all means, tell us what you think, tell us why you think it, ask for criticism, make objections, but be genuinely open to the possibility that you might not be a very clear thinker yet. It's not like it means you're stupid. It just means your haven't improved your skills enough. It takes time and effort, after all. I think if people had more respect for just how difficult -- I mean, really, really difficult -- philosophy is, they wouldn't have such a problem admitting that they aren't that good at it.

I'm glad you said I helped noobs. I did more so than anyone here. I think people overlook this, especially if they aren't noobs themselves, because I was also the most vitriolic member. But my vitriol was reserved for arrogant dumbasses. And, yes, I determine who the arrogant dumbasses are.

Not sure which forum this topic should go in, but it seemed to fit into ethics...

I enjoyed reading from this site for about a year or so prior to ever joining and continued to read and enjoy it for another prior to my ever posting. I am very aware of the quality of thinking which I had become accustomed to reading here. The topics were both very informative and intriguing. The academic circles are just that, and more than anything I am extremely appreciative and grateful for the opportunity to even be able to read such dialogue. The depth of the understanding was one pivotal factor which caused me to further pursue philosophy. With that being said...

The members which I had grown fond of seem to have vanished from the threads for the most part.

Why?

There are genuinely interested people such as myself who feel this compulsion to pursue knowledge. I read as much of the Philosopher Kings as I can. Given enough time feel as though I 'walk away' understanding the point of view, however, I am biased in my thinking, as I believe that we all must be, and I wanted some of these more well educated perspectives to bounce my own thinking off of. I wanted to learn more through sharing another's eyes, as it were. I am looking for someone to point out the inconsistencies in my own thoughts, so that I can reassess those. I am feeling rather disappointed.

Expectations can lead to that, I suppose.

Anyone???

Perhaps it is the depth of understanding that is the issue?

I can see where one who is well-versed would not be that interested in having a conversation with another who had little to no knowledge regarding the topic, however, ethically speaking...

The more reasonable people the better. Change in thought demands being exposed to 'better', does it not?

creativesoul wrote:

The members which I had grown fond of seem to have vanished from the threads for the most part.

Why?


Like any place, people come and go. This site is almost ten years old and more than 16,000 people have signed up at one point or another. I imagine a few more will sign up and contribute something of interest.


I enjoyed reading from this site for about a year or so prior to ever joining and continued to read and enjoy it for another prior to my ever posting. . .I am feeling rather disappointed.


Two years is a good run for a featherless biped with a short attention span. Really, how many things keep your interest for even one year? Quit while you're ahead if necessary. These are good stats.

Nah, I just delve back into some older threads if need be...



I've always been interested in philosophy, I just had no idea that I was.

--best left out--