• Jack Cummins
    990

    I am not opposed to the thread as it obviously has given rise to a lot of opinions that could not be expressed anywhere else. I can see deeper conversations on it this evening, so I hope that it continues.

    Just as people are offloading their frustration onto the political ones mine is surfacing here.Different site members express their views differently, so I hope that you can accept my view just as much as others' opinions because I do appreciate the site.
  • praxis
    3.1k
    I don't believe that you believe that none can understand your ideas about the nature of thought.
    — praxis

    Whether readers can understand is largely unknown here. It does seem true that this topic routinely fails to engage. That used to frustrate me, but lately I'm learning not to worry about it too much.
    Hippyhead

    I was considering starting a topic on it in the hope of putting it out of its misery and started a bit of research, starting with a forum search for "nature of thought." Turns out that I appear to have discussed the topic with you more that I thought. You are Jake, right? a guy that was banned a couple of years ago for posting a picture of your wife's boobies.
  • Hippyhead
    1.1k
    there are also patterns of interlinked threads on more interesting and intricate philosophical issues, which would be lost were these suggestions taken on board.Banno

    Again, you're commenting on the suggestions without bothering to understand them, or perhaps even read them. The exact opposite of what you just said is true. If a thread was full of interesting philosophical issues it could be located above the fold in the Articles section, where it would not be buried amongst a pile of junk. Thus, it would be more visible, not less.

    The whole point of such organization is to make the forum more appealing to new visitors who are capable of adding value to the forum. Those who can't or won't add value, and everyone else as well, could still do pretty much whatever they want in the Conversation area which would be available to all registered members.

    The way to debunk me is to ask why I am bothering to explain all this, yet again. I have no good answer to that, I must admit.
  • Hippyhead
    1.1k
    ↪Hippyhead So... are we doing the call-and-answer thing?Banno

    This could be clever and funny, if it was posted on Facebook.
  • Brett
    3k


    You’re dealing with dead wood here. Very odd the lack of interest. Almost denial.
  • Hippyhead
    1.1k
    You’re dealing with dead wood here. Very odd the lack of interest. Almost denial.Brett

    It's very normal though. I've had this conversation a number of times in a number of places and it always goes exactly the same way.

    So for this piece of dead wood it's become an exercise in how to enthusiastically embrace a topic of interest while at the same time letting it go. It's kind of like one of those Buddhist stories where the master tells you to create an elaborate pattern out of colored rocks. After two weeks you're finally done and then the master comes along and quickly kicks it all away with his foot, and tells you to do it again. You're supposed to learn how to enthusiastically embrace the moment, without getting attached to the outcome.

    A work in progress here...
  • Banno
    10.5k
    A work in progress here...Hippyhead

    ...forever unfinished.
123Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.