Why were some of the other forum boards closed?

[Genecks]

I haven't been around in a while, but I'd like to know why some of the other forums were closed. I don't understand why positions and status of things on the forum have changed. Could someone give a link within certain threads that discuss the reason for certain forum boards closing?

 

To tell you the truth, I see the religion board as important.

However, I'd like to take a different view at it.

 

Lately, I've been studying religion, politics, and philosophy. Being that I'm a science major, I've learned that these three things play into how people go about science. In other words, they shape the ethics of science and what people are allowed to do.

 

Now, you might be able to say, "Screw religion. Throw everything in politics," and that wouldn't be such a wrong way of going about things. However, I do think that somewhat misrepresents science and religion. Certain medical science topics of becoming of concern to some persons. I believe either way you look at it, you're going to have the ethical discussions on a science forum.

 

What would I do?

 

I've been spending some time at Philosophyforums.com, so I have an idea of how religion and philosophy works.

 

Since religion can fall under the category of philosophy, you could create a different forum. This would create a compromise and allow religion, philosophy, and science to be discussed and related. The way people had it before was philosophy and religion: I believe those topics are simply to themselves. However, there is a way to make these more relevant to a science board.

 

Create a board on this: Philosophy and Science.

 

People could always argue about the term 'philosophy' being indefinte, but ethical, religious, etc. things could be thrown in there. You could target the philosophy of science, ethics, religion, etc.

 

Such a board would allow religious, philosophical, and other discussion to be entertained. However, if things go right, they would be related to science.

 

Or better yet... Philosophy in relation to science

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

http://www.scienceforums.net/showthread.php?t=22842

[Genecks]

Foremost, SFN is a science forum. It should be pretty clear by now that in most cases, science and religion just don't mix at all. - Dave

 

Science, religion, and philosophy do mix. You're claiming that they don't mix at all, thus they never mix. Yet the philosophy of mind (spirit) is of importance to neuroscience, cybernetics, and many other topics. Also, the way the universe works (the absolute, etc.) relates to physics, which often try to understand the universe in numbers (or a Pythagorean view). Although philosophers may have created views that have contributed toward science, religions have created theories, too. These theories that could contribute to science should not be thrown out all together. More than anything, philosophy covers ethics, politics, religion, and science.

 

Have you not heard of the philosophy of science?

 

What makes a theory a theory?

What makes a hypothesis a hypothesis?

 

Should we use euthanasia?

Should we not use euthanasia?

What do religions think about euthanasia?

Can we persuade religions to accept science?

 

Is there something in their religion's philosophy that might allow science to be accepted in their lives?

 

On top of this, the debating on religious matters has started to spill over into some of the scientific areas, and this is starting to detract from the quality of posts that we have here. - Dave

 

I don't really see you giving any examples. I see details, but this unseen reality has me confused. I have no way of understanding the things your perceive, nor do I understand your grounds. Matter of fact, I don't believe an opinion is grounds enough to take out a forum.

 

Personally, I don't think that this is good in any shape or form.

 

Understood. Anything that takes away from the idea of science making a scientific forum is a 'bad thing.'

 

It was clear from talking to the mods and just skimming the threads that there's some pretty nasty debating going on there...

 

I don't really understand what you mean by "nasty." If you're talking about debates that simply turn into chaotic quarrels without logic, then you're talking about debates with lack of proper argumentation.

 

The thing that I've always liked about SFN is the community - we have a good bunch of people here, and it's been friendly and inviting to newcomers.

 

Good for you?

Yet it seems some of these people aren't too happy with your decision.

 

From my perspective, I could potentially see P&R ruining everything that we've built up, from the community to the quality of posts we have here.

 

Yet you've failed to give decent details and examples. Also, what's the possibility that it is helping the forum? Have you given any examples of what a 'decent' or 'not nasty' argument is? Why did you build the board in the first place? Did you have a set standard?

 

Now, for those of you who are regular contributors to the P&R forum, fear not! In the next few days, we should hopefully move over all of the posts and users from P&R to a new, clean forum.

 

This is where the problem exists. You are moving a section that is important and contributes to science to the margins of the Internet. You are trying to this a more secular board around science. Yet science did rise from philosophy. Putting something on the margins implies that it should not be seen or heard. Yet a small amount of people are stating this: Moderators and admins.

 

I believe the majority of persons would be willing to keep the board on. I haven't seen many comments from others. Some of the comments on the board seem to be a negative reaction to this action. Therefore, there may need to be adjustments.

 

Yet I believe that the P&R board should exist. It will allow people to understand philosophy and science and things that revolve around it. I suggest that it is reinstated, because it is a part of this forum that should remain active; and it is of interest to many. I propose that more moderators are created for the P&R board. A science based forum may seem like a good idea, but moving a section of importance implies that the board is to become more secular; and that is a problem. We can't create a war by having science and religion as seperate things. We do need to discriminate between both, but we do need both to understand each other in the same place. We need a way for people to understand and accept each other. We can't hide things from each other, because they'll eventually cross.

[Mokele]

Science is linked to a wide variety of things, but we cannot have boards for all of them. The main issue was that P&R was getting most of the attention (and not for topics even close to science) and generating a major headache in moderation.

 

Furthermore, P&R will be resurrected on a new forum, linked to this one but with separate mods and suchlike.

 

Mokele

[DaveC426913]

Have you not heard of the philosophy of science?

Sure, and that would be great - on a Philosophy Board. This is a science board. Is there a science of philosophy?

 

I don't really see you giving any examples ... I don't believe an opinion is grounds enough to take out a forum. Why did you build the board in the first place? Did you have a set standard?

As a bystander, I am curious as to what you hope to achieve. Do you believe that if the admins and moderators can't or won't defend against your arguments, they will concede, and put the forums back up? Do you think they need to justify themselves?

 

Yet science did rise from philosophy.

It also arose from diety worship in trying to understand weather and seasons. Does that mean they should open the forum to pantheistic discussion? The fox that chases many rabbits, usually gets none. Any forum must define limits.

 

Putting something on the margins implies that it should not be seen or heard.

I think you are putting words in other peoples' mouths here.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

As a bystander, I am curious as to what you hope to achieve. Do you believe that if the admins and moderators can't or won't defend against your arguments, they will concede, and put the forums back up? Do you think they need to justify themselves?

We'll gladly concede if they're good arguments.

[iglak]

We'll gladly concede if they're good arguments.

that's what science is all about

[Sayonara]

I haven't been around in a while, but I'd like to know why some of the other forums were closed. I don't understand why positions and status of things on the forum have changed. Could someone give a link within certain threads that discuss the reason for certain forum boards closing?

As you have no doubt gathered already, all large scale changes to the forums are announced in the "Announcements" forum, for that is its purpose.

 

Failing that, there is an advanced search function.

 

 

Since religion can fall under the category of philosophy, you could create a different forum. This would create a compromise and allow religion, philosophy, and science to be discussed and related. The way people had it before was philosophy and religion: I believe those topics are simply to themselves. However, there is a way to make these more relevant to a science board.

We don't want to "make them relevant".

 

What we want is for science-relevant philosophy to stay here, and for religion-relevant philosophy to go to the new religion forum. Which is exactly what is going to happen.

 

 

You have not raised a single issue that the staff have not already discussed at great length.