I voted close but with a caveat. I think some template should be produced of existing arguments for and against God. Like the ontological argument, or the problem of evil, etc.

Not a hard task given Wikipedia.

If it is closed all of the yokels will come to the lounge spewing gobbledygook all over the place where we come to relax.

Why do you want it closed?

To be brief, I think the evidence of the site is that a philosophical discussion of religion is not possible here. — tim wood

From personal experience, it's people like you who make discussing the philosophy of religion difficult.

This is when you notice that secularism, which is ostensibly a value-free framework within which ideas of all kinds can be debated and discussed, actually has its own ideological content. Not that its proponents would ever be able to acknowledge that.

Yeah, nah.

A disturbingly insane idea. There are lots of low quality phil of religion threads, of course, but you can't strong arm or wish-fulfill your way into the type of philosophical milieu you wish you existed in. The reality is that you exist in one where there's a large push (often from younger people) to ask these questions, albeit often poorly.

The more interesting question is why all these threads exist.

The forum owner and administration can do whatever they want. It’s not a democracy, so this is a wasted effort.

:cheer:

To be brief, I think the evidence of the site is that a philosophical discussion of religion is not possible here. — tim wood

If not here, then where?

I do get what you are saying though. I find most of the religion/atheism threads to be boring and repetitive. However, I voted to keep the section, because for about a year, those posts did not bore me. I had thoughts and questions, and was surprised to see the positions of other people. But after reading and/or participating in many of those threads, I feel I have likely said/heard all the major points that can be made.

So while I agree that those threads can't go anywhere for those who are experienced in the discussion, they can be interesting and even informative to people who are new to philosophy (and I don't mean new to serious academic philosophy, I mean new to delving into questions like "is there a god?")

But I certainly understand your feelings that those threads are quite unproductive.

The forum owner and administration can do whatever they want. It’s not a democracy, so this is a wasted effort. — praxis

Yes, agreed, and based on my experience, let me emphasize that we should not even want a democracy in these matters. The populace should have no say whatsoever over the rules, let alone, be allowed to vote over them. I hate democracy, because I profoundly hate the stupidity and ignorance of the unwashed masses.

Vulgus, plebs imperitum ad deteriora promptum.

Because after years of reading in the Philosophy of Religion Forum, I cannot remember any thread there that was a philosophical discussion. Not least bcause even any discussion towards an agreement on terms seems impossible, never mind reasonable argument. To have a discussion, the participants have to be talking about some thing to some end. Maybe some people can, but apparently not here. Why call that philosophy? Instead to The Lounge, and see who follows it there.

i vote to end all discussions on post modernism. But i won't get what i want. I feel this post by the OP is trolling.

I feel this post by the OP is trolling. — christian2017

How so?

Right, your opinion is duly noted but thats not a good reason to abolish the religion forum. Obviously people enjoy and participate in that forum, so get your head out of your ass. Your OP is a shameful move for anyone interested in philosophy and discourse, and an online community like this one.

May I suggest an alternative (that someone may suggest to the software developers): a user-by-user ability to unsubscribe some subforums from the main page?

Obviously people enjoy and participate in that forum, — DingoJones

Granted for the sake of argument. But my point is that what is done there, in my relatively long experience, never rises to the level of philosophy, that is, a discussion of ideas with a reasoned and reasonable back-and-forth. So why have it in a philosophy section of a philosophy forum? I mean this as a substantive question and not merely a rhetorical question. Your position seems to be that the purpose is pleasure and participation. And I agree, so long as some philosophy happens. Nor am I in any sense a philosophy snob - I'm not that good at it! But I know a reasonable discussion when I encounter it, and that forum has never quite gotten there. Maybe it's a failure to understand the subject matter, which, as a philosophy of, is thinking about the thinking about a determinate subject matter. Religion seems to have an overall ability to inhibit and even block thinking in lots of people. So to The Lounge. You get to vote against; I assume you have. Nor do I suppose that the vote will change anything; I'd be very surprised if it did. But let's see how it goes.

I think if not abolish then at least entertain what has been said by other folk 100x over? A newbie might get more out of a 5 minute read on Wikipedia for proofs for or against God than trying to derive the same concepts propounded x years/decades ago?

The forum owner and administration can do whatever they want. It’s not a democracy, so this is a wasted effort. — praxis

Not at all. We've voted on things before. We used to be able to "like" posts but we voted to remove that.

Im aware that you asked for votes, and that you are very unlikely to bring about what you suggest. It is none the less shameful for anyone claiming an interest in philosophy and discourse, or for someone acting as part of a community to suggest or call for suppression or abolishment of topics/discourse they happen to dislike and/or get nothing out of themselves.
Also, it IS snobby to dismiss all those discussions and people as ignorant or unreasonable. Just because you have the foresight to bring that up before being accused of it doesnt mean your not doing it. Ridiculing religion and the religious is actually classic philosophical snobbery, and note I understand how well religion and the religious can make such snobbery not only easy but justified. Whats shameful isnt the snobbery, its the call you’ve made to satisfy your own sense of philosophical purity. It is a more unworthy act for a philosopher than chasing ones tail in a philosophy of religion forum, thats for sure.
So I say again, shame on you.

Perhaps with some justification were I doing anything that you say that I am doing. But I've called for no suppression or abolishment, only a change of name and address. the cow in the barn, the chicken in the coop, the pig in the sty, the farmer in his house, and so forth. Nor do I dismiss the discussions. I did say and do say that there is stunning lack of what I understand to be philosophical-quality discussion in them. You yourself note the capacity of the subject matter to defeat itself as philosophy, yet apparently want it to retain the cloak of philosophy. Why?

But my point is that what is done there, in my relatively long experience, never rises to the level of philosophy, that is, a discussion of ideas with a reasoned and reasonable back-and-forth. — tim wood

You could say the same thing about discussions elsewhere on the forum, with the same justification.

Not least bcause even any discussion towards an agreement on terms seems impossible, never mind reasonable argument. — tim wood

Oh right, just as I thought. Your own recent thread in that forum didn't go to your liking, so you are lashing out against the forum. (I didn't look at it much, TBH - the premise for the discussion didn't look promising.)

:naughty:

Of course not. If you can't just 'be in the subforum and not of the subforum, then don't go slumming there. Besides, running of the bulls____ keeps rodeo clowns like me off the streets and out of saloons or houses of ill repute. Thank Great Googly Moogly! You sermonizing like this (instead of philosophizing), Rev. Tim, is just some old-time foolishness of the wise. :yawn:

And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire. — Matthew 18:9

:pray: Nah, flayers are good for the sole; let us prey ...

It's possible, to remove sections from your 'all discussions' page. I just have the religion section turned off, so I only go there knowing what I'm getting into.

That said, I think the decision to keep the Lounge off the public front page is a good one in terms of the kind of people it would be good have on board. We should present a more serious face, I think, and the plethora of stupid theism/atheism discussions are not helping. That said...

You could say the same thing about discussions elsewhere on the forum, with the same justification. — SophistiCat

...is the point. I don't mind the number of threads of (what I think of as) poor quality discussion (also some really good ones in the past have petered out, or deteriorated into garbage), but it would be nice to have something like the (lounge/not lounge) distinction for serious/not serious discussion. We could have a fairly simple rule that the discussion should be about some published paper, which participants should have read, that would be relatively incontestable (so not require a huge increase in moderator effort) and should clear out a lot of the garbage.

Why have a philosophy forum without religion? If i did the same thing in reverse i can guarantee you the OP would be taken down.

Religion seems to have an overall ability to inhibit and even block thinking in lots of people. So to The Lounge. — tim wood

If this is the case, then all the more reason to discuss it.
It is clearly a vital issue. Get it out in the open.

To be brief, I think the evidence of the site is that a philosophical discussion of religion is not possible here. I vote, then, that the forum be "disappeared." And any post on such a topic be folded into The Lounge. — tim wood

The evidence shows that there is a desire for such discussion. About various aspects of religion and spirituality. Clearly, it is possible. Why on earth should it be 'folded' ?
The philosophical perspective remains pertinent.
The mods are there to overview any problems.
If you have concerns about content, follow the guidance and let them do their job.

I’d sooner vote for banning Tim Wood than preventing religious people fro discussing on a forum where some of their more ‘radical’ ideas may actually be questioned rationally and politely.

I don’t see how creating a bubble as to what can and cannot be brought into philosophical discussion would be helpful for anyone. That said specialised forums for ‘Ethics’ or ‘Philosophy of Science’ can be great too. There is a need for sites that look at the broader field of play just as there is for ones that look at the narrower field of play.

I was under the impression this was a forum that dealt with every aspect of philosophical discourse. Theology and the Philosophy of Religion are necessary parts of human activity and so I don’t see how it would help to cut them off?

That said it does help if people take their arguments up in the correct forum rather than spilling over into other areas. It will inevitably happen from time to time though.

Because after years of reading in the Philosophy of Religion Forum, I cannot remember any thread there that was a philosophical discussion. — tim wood

We should also get rid of discussions of metaphysics, politics, feminism, definitely anti-natalism...

in fact as I think of it, most threads seem to not meet the criteria of good philosophical discussion. People talk past each other. People cherry pick. People use straw man arguments. People insult. People go in circles and repeat arguments I have seen years ago.

Let's make the whole thing a Lounge.

(and yes, I know, there are likely differences of degree between subjects and I am being polemical, though that quality should fit in well in the thread.)

You could say the same thing about discussions elsewhere on the forum, with the same justification. — SophistiCat

I agree and I also think it is taking two to tango in all of those not up to snuff discussions. People rarely seem to notice what their own team is doing in these threads, and it ain't pretty.

Asking for the “disappearing” of a sub forum, or having it “folded” elsewhere is asking for abolishment. You are removing it from the philosophical discourse and putting it somewhere that better suits your sensibilities. You are trying to eliminate religious Philosophical discussion from the rest of the philosophical discussions. I don’t think abolishment is too strong a word, you are asking to remove religious philosophy from the rest of the philosophy. So I stand by that and everything else ive said on the subject, although my points are superseded by a point made by others: you could say the same thing about any philosophical discussion/topic on this forums. Hence my initial observation that you have no good reason to be calling for the “disappearing” of the religion sub forum.
Also, hilariously you use “abolish” in the title. You will have to forgive me for using the same term that you do. I repeat: get your head outta your ass.