History Section

[Raider5678]

Hello guys,

So, a lot of my time is spent reading about history, studying it, writing about it, etc. And I mean a vast majority of my time.

And while I know this is a science forum, I feel that if we can have a politics section, which arguably has less to do with science and politics then it does with pure politics at this moment, it wouldn't overly hurt us to have a history section.

Would anyone else agree that having a section open about history would be good as well? I mean the same basic rules could apply. You have to have evidence, you have to list sources, you can't preach, etc.

Just my personal suggestion and I'm curious what other's on this forum think. I personally would love to start a discussion about Christopher Columbus. 

[dimreepr]

9 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Just my personal suggestion and I'm curious what other's on this forum think. I personally would love to start a discussion about Christopher Columbus. 

 

and I'm curious to read it. You could use the lounge, for now.

[zapatos]

The majority of the books I read are historical in nature. I'd certainly participate.

[iNow]

Appreciate the sentiment, but hate the idea of categorizing topics at a more granular level. Don't know about you, but I HATE trying to sort through someone else's folder structure when looking for a file. Same challenge here when adding new subforums/fora

[Raider5678]

20 minutes ago, iNow said:

Appreciate the sentiment, but hate the idea of categorizing topics at a more granular level. Don't know about you, but I HATE trying to sort through someone else's folder structure when looking for a file. Same challenge here when adding new subforums/fora

I'm not sure I follow exactly. Could you elaborate?

Do you mean it's hard to make, you don't want to have to figure out a history section, or etc?

[iNow]

It's easy to make. The question is whether it improves usability or diminishes usability for the standard end user.

Ever look at someone else's c:\ drive or cloud storage folder setup? Ever do this while looking for something very specific? This is something I deal with everyday. Someone else setup the structure, now I need to go find where in that structure they put the file I need.... Same thing here when looking at subforums. 

New member comes to the forum. Wants to post a new topic. They through the list of subforums... Physics, chemistry, math, philosophy, religion, ethics, lounge, politics... and 25 others, and all of this is before you get to the subfolders within those subforums... and just give up or leave. Or, maybe I"m trying to find a topic I engaged in a few months ago because there's an update... was that thread in philosophy or was it in ethics? Was it in politics or religion? Where was it!?!

I like the idea of discussing History. I suspect we could do so within existing folder structure without making worse the problem I describe above.

I don't care, though. Just sharing an alternative perspective to consider before proceeding.

[StringJunky]

27 minutes ago, iNow said:

It's easy to make. The question is whether it improves usability or diminishes usability for the standard end user.

Ever look at someone else's c:\ drive or cloud storage folder setup? Ever do this while looking for something very specific? This is something I deal with everyday. Someone else setup the structure, now I need to go find where in that structure they put the file I need.... Same thing here when looking at subforums. 

New member comes to the forum. Wants to post a new topic. They through the list of subforums... Physics, chemistry, math, philosophy, religion, ethics, lounge, politics... and 25 others, and all of this is before you get to the subfolders within those subforums... and just give up or leave. Or, maybe I"m trying to find a topic I engaged in a few months ago because there's an update... was that thread in philosophy or was it in ethics? Was it in politics or religion? Where was it!?!

I like the idea of discussing History. I suspect we could do so within existing folder structure without making worse the problem I describe above.

I don't care, though. Just sharing an alternative perspective to consider before proceeding.

KISS 

[Raider5678]

Why is there no forum for History?

[Externet]

Perhaps it is not science ?

[arc]

5 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

Why is there no forum for History?

There is, its about planetary history. We call it Geology.

[arc]

History has become much more subjective to broader opinions as our society has become more diverse in a multitude of aspects. You mention Columbus; did you know the Italians had made quite a big deal about him at the Columbia Exposition and were quite peeved when the Scandinavians moored a Viking ship within sight of there pavilion. So, you can now add an indigenous eliment to the disscusion and it could get rather contentious due to emotional elements involving religion, race, genicide, geography and so on. I would wager many conversationists would struggle to stay out of the potentionally contentious political aspect of the subjects. Look at the religion and politics sections for example. Don’t get me wrong though, I enjoy talking history as much as anyone, but the key word here is enjoy.

[Silvestru]

4 hours ago, Externet said:

Perhaps it is not science ?

We have a Religion, Philosophy, Politics section.

What about a Hobby section? Would bring some silliness and fun to the forum while also not interfering with the other serious sections.

[Raider5678]

6 hours ago, arc said:

There is, its about planetary history. We call it Geology.

But it's not really about human history.

[Raider5678]

5 hours ago, arc said:

History has become much more subjective to broader opinions as our society has become more diverse in a multitude of aspects.

Politics and Ethics haven't?

5 hours ago, arc said:

You mention Columbus; did you know the Italians had made quite a big deal about him at the Columbia Exposition and were quite peeved when the Scandinavians moored a Viking ship within sight of there pavilion. So, you can now add an indigenous eliment to the disscusion and it could get rather contentious due to emotional elements involving religion, race, genicide, geography and so on.

It seems more like simply stating a fact. I don't think many people on here are going to get emotional by the fact that the Italians were annoyed at the Scandinavian Vikings . 

5 hours ago, arc said:

I would wager many conversationists would struggle to stay out of the potentionally contentious political aspect of the subjects.

They have a hard time staying out of potentially political discussions in other topics as well. We still have them. Ethics, for example.

6 hours ago, arc said:

Look at the religion and politics sections for example. Don’t get me wrong though, I enjoy talking history as much as anyone, but the key word here is enjoy.

And I'm saying we already have those, and they don't cause massive problems that I'm aware of. Why can't we have a history section?

[Prometheus]

8 hours ago, arc said:

History has become much more subjective to broader opinions as our society has become more diverse in a multitude of aspects. 

Pliny the Elder was hardly being subjective when talking about the barbarians (i.e. everyone not Roman). Things have got a lot better, we just expect more now.

Can there be a mythology subsection to the history forum (or can we put the entire religion forum as a subsection to mythology)?

[DirtyChai]

On 12/11/2018 at 11:44 AM, Prometheus said:

can we put the entire religion forum as a subsection to mythology

One of the biggest complaints against religion in this forum is, "THIS IS A SCIENCE FORUM!"

So why even have a religion section in a science forum anyway?  You'd think they'd have a history section before religion, right?  But the fact is that history isn't as divisive/entertaining as religion and wouldn't draw in nearly as much people.

It's also clear that the religious forums here aren't meant  to promote religion as much as they are to provide a platform to bash it. . .

Edited December 13, 2018 by DirtyChai

[beecee]

47 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

It's also clear that the religious forums here aren't meant  to promote religion as much as they are to provide a platform to bash it. . .

You don't see the bashing on both sides?

[DirtyChai]

5 minutes ago, beecee said:

54 minutes ago, DirtyChai said:

It's also clear that the religious forums here aren't meant  to promote religion as much as they are to provide a platform to bash it. . .

You don't see the bashing on both sides?

Of course I do. . .

It's no different than religious sites where bigots come it and start bashing people's beliefs. .

But just like this forum, they invite it with science subsections. . .

Then everyone starts bitching at each other.

Edited December 13, 2018 by DirtyChai

[Raider5678]

6 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

wouldn't draw in nearly as much people.

I'm fine with that, as long as it draws in the right people.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do the administrators have anything to say regarding a history forum or should we just continue with this discussion for a while more to get more input?

Edited December 13, 2018 by Raider5678

[iNow]

6 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

So why even have a religion section in a science forum anyway?

It’s a lightning rod to prevent religious discussion from littering up the other science based sections.

When religion was removed as a subforum in the past, biology and cosmology became where these unavoidable conversations kept landing. Better to acknowledge these conversations will occur and given them a properly quarantined home.

Also, like politics, the topic is inherently interesting to many of us and it’s nice being able to explore its various intricacies with other generally rational and intelligent members here. 

[swansont]

5 hours ago, DirtyChai said:

Of course I do. . .

It's no different than religious sites where bigots come it and start bashing people's beliefs. .

But just like this forum, they invite it with science subsections. . .

Then everyone starts bitching at each other.

I don't see that. It happens on the fringe, where people are pushing ideas that are not (yet) mainstream, or otherwise have some axe to grind, which means speculations. But not so much within mainstream science.

Any event of bashing beliefs should be reported.

[dimreepr]

6 minutes ago, swansont said:

I don't see that. It happens on the fringe, where people are pushing ideas that are not (yet) mainstream, or otherwise have some axe to grind, which means speculations. But not so much within mainstream science.

Any event of bashing beliefs should be reported.

2

I prefer this

7 minutes ago, iNow said:

It’s a lightning rod to prevent religious discussion from littering up the other science based sections.

When religion was removed as a subforum in the past, biology and cosmology became where these unavoidable conversations kept landing. Better to acknowledge these conversations will occur and given them a properly quarantined home.

Also, like politics, the topic is inherently interesting to many of us and it’s nice being able to explore its various intricacies with other generally rational and intelligent members here. 

3

 

Edited December 13, 2018 by dimreepr

[swansont]

24 minutes ago, iNow said:

 Also, like politics, the topic is inherently interesting to many of us and it’s nice being able to explore its various intricacies with other generally rational and intelligent members here. 

Yes, this. The baseline membership here is used to fact-based discussion. We will have differences of opinion, but there's a much better chance of having a common acknowledgement of facts, and the habit of being able to support discussion with citations, rather than bald assertions. It's not perfect, but between the science basis and the moderation policies it's not the cesspit that many other sites are.

 

"History" does not have the same history as iNow described as with religion. There's not as much traction to create a new section. Philosophy does, as it has a relationship with science, and religion with that as well. The history of some particular science can fit in within that science's group (such as a discussion of the progression of atomic models through the last 19th and early 20th century; Rutherford and Bohr, et al — that could go in physics). Some history is also a discussion of politics.

Part of the equation is having a critical mass of people to discuss a particular topic.

 

[Raider5678]

2 minutes ago, swansont said:

it's not the cesspit that many other sites are.

Being on several other forums, let me point out the political discussion on this site is usually 9/10.

A 10/10 being an actual in-person political discussion since I simply enjoy those more.

 

 

Anyways, I don't suppose you have any news on if we're getting a history section or not?

Edited December 13, 2018 by Raider5678

[swansont]

4 minutes ago, Raider5678 said:

Anyways, I don't suppose you have any news on if we're getting a history section or not?

This time of year discussions amongst staff tend to take longer, since people are busy and also traveling. Both tend to put a dent in time spent here.