Deleted for low quality.

By the way feedback goes in Feedback. Not here. Moved.

Can you give me a bit more clarification for future use?

Coming up.

It's going to be fairly direct because we get a lot of stuff like this, especially in Philosophy of Religion, and I would like it to stop, so it's not just aimed at you, it's not meant to sound as harsh as it probably will, and there's no need to be discouraged by it. I'll try to give a bit of help after the critique.

Your OP:

Can God kill himself?
Does our ability to contemplate suicide and then carry it out suggest a measure of profound development in our evolution? Is it the ultimate act of a conscious being, to turn back on itself, to destroy what it is?

Animals don’t seem to do it, (I’ve heard of things, but the evidence is hazy) and if they could how would they do it, a gun, a knife? Are they even aware that they have a life that can be taken, let alone take it themselves?

And, in evolutionary terms how did this happen, why does suicide exist? Isn’t it contrary to the fight for life, ending the trajectory of your own genes? — Brett

So...

Can God kill himself?

My first thought: If you believe in God, the question doesn't arise. If you don't, it doesn't matter.

Does our ability to contemplate suicide and then carry it out suggest a measure of profound development in our evolution?

Relevance to questionably relevant OP not established.

Is it the ultimate act of a conscious being, to turn back on itself, to destroy what it is?

I have no idea why it would be. Is it the ultimate act of a conscious being to wear shorts? Have you got something of substance to say here?

Animals don’t seem to do it, (I’ve heard of things, but the evidence is hazy)

So, do they or not? And it's relevant why?

and if they could how would they do it, a gun, a knife?

That might be hard for a penguin. I would suggest neither.

Are they even aware that they have a life that can be taken, let alone take it themselves?

Don't ask us. We're still trying to figure out the God-animal connection here.

And, in evolutionary terms how did this happen, why does suicide exist? Isn’t it contrary to the fight for life, ending the trajectory of your own genes?

For who? I thought animals didn't do it. And God didn't evolve. Oh, we're talking about people now. So go on then.

Wait, that's it? :confused:

----

How to improve it:

THE QUESTION
If you don't have a clear well thought-out question or claim, you don't have an OP. So, have one and one of some importance (at least to you) in mind. And know and be able to explain why it's important as its importance might be questioned.

THE CONTENT
One easy way to structure an OP based on a question is as follows:

a) Background information

• What is the question and the context of the question (historical or otherwise)?
• Is the question very controversial? If so, why?
• How have others answered the question?
• What's your motivation for asking the question?

etc.
(This is all part of establishing why we should care about the question)

b)Thesis
What is your position on the question?
(You don't have to go into full detail here as you can do that as the discussion progresses, but you could give a summary of the main reasons for your stance.)

c) Lead in
What do you want from the discussion?
Make any clarifications you need to here. (For example, if people commonly answer this question with a misunderstanding, here's your chance to head it off at the pass).

And maybe most of all, your OP should be about a specific clearly-defined topic that you stick to. If you can't even stay on topic in the first post, it's already a bust.

You can do all that and do it well in as little as 200 words.

Hope that helps.

I think that’s quite reasonable. But ... for me it’s the beginning of an investigation, if you like, into a topic that’s of interest to me. I don’t know exactly what my position is because I’ve just stepped into a dark room. I’m hoping others might open things up and that we can discover things that way. Probably naive there because generally the site is more combative. Anyway I’ll try and keep what you say in mind. But i don’t think it allows for differences in approach or personalities, etc.

I don’t know exactly what my position is because I’ve just stepped into a dark room — Brett

Ok, but that's not what we want here. No dark rooms unless you've got a flashlight.

Probably naive there because generally the site is more combative ... but i don’t think it allows for differences in approach or personalities, etc. — Brett

It's not necessarily about personality. Being able to outline and defend a position does not make you combative, it makes you able. If you're not, to inflect a shit slogan: Just don't do it. Wait until you are. In the meantime, there's the learning center or just read and study and contiribute more to others' discussions. There's no shame whatsoever in not starting discussions. They're hard work and supposed to be hard work.

Ok, but that's not what we want here. No dark rooms unless you've got a flashlight. — Baden

I wish I could come up with a line like that.

Actually, Baden, that breakdown is (imho) a masterful instruction for most of the rest of us - all, if you include the spirit of the thing. I have some idea of the effort involved, and I shall appreciate it not only on my behalf, but for others who don't, won't, or can't. Thank you! And by the way, you get nominated for tenure, here, (whether you want it or not!).

Oh, thanks, tim!

Excellent critique with advice for improvement.

I think this more detailed information should be attached to the general 'Site Guidelines' thread, so that people have a clearer idea of what is involved. As things stand, we have:

b) Able to write a thoughtful OP of reasonable length that illustrates this interest, and to provide arguments for any position you intend to advocate. — Baden

Very nice guidelines. The only thing I would contest is that I think one doesn't have to have a position on an issue and defend it in an OP; instead, one could ask an open-ended question or suggest a topic for discussion. But motivation, background, focus, etc. - all that is important.

The most obvious flaw of your OP is that you don't even try to address the stated topic. The title question is about God, but the post talks about animals? WTF? It's like you had one question in mind, then while writing out your thoughts you digressed into related issues, and finally you just said to yourself: "Fuck it, this is hard work!" And just hit the Post button.

Cheers, Amity. I'd be concerned about overloading the guidelines (it's enough trouble to get posters to read them as they are) but I might put a version in resources ("How to Write an OP" or something).

The only thing I would contest is that I think one doesn't have to have a position on an issue and defend it in an OP; instead, one could ask an open-ended question or suggest a topic for discussion. But motivation, background, focus, etc. - all that is important. — SophistiCat

There's a bit of flexibility there. A tentative position would be enough for me. But I suppose the real crux is that because the OP writer is primarily responsible for their discussion, they should be willing and capable of leading it or the danger is no-one will (which, without mentioning any names, has definitely happened). Again, a flashlight—even if the batteries are dodgy. There are some exceptions; we have a specific Question sub-category, for example, where the whole idea is to be confused about something; and some subjects might be more speculative just by their nature. But what I've outlined would certainly be my general idea of good practice at least.

:cool: :up:

I'd be concerned about overloading the guidelines (it's enough trouble to get posters to read them as they are) but I might put a version in resources ("How to Write an OP" or something). — Baden

Yes, I understand the concern. To avoid overload, couldn't you include a link to the Resources section.
I am not sure that posters visit this section all that much.
It's a shame because the material there is most useful.

couldn't you include a link to the Resources section. — Amity

Not a bad idea. :up:

The most obvious flaw of your OP is that you don't even try to address the stated topic. The title question is about God, but the post talks about animals? WTF? It's like you had one question in mind, then while writing out your thoughts you digressed into related issues, and finally you just said to yourself: "Fuck it, this is hard work!" And just hit the Post button. — SophistiCat

I think it was a combination of laziness and impatience. It’s not like I can’t put together an OP, because I have in the past. In my mind there was a large, amorphous idea, or concept, that I wanted to pull together, or join the dots.
I’ve always been interested and influenced by interviews in the sixties and seventies, that weren’t so much interviews but free flowing discussions between two people. One in particular I remember was between Norman Mailer and an interviewer I don’t know the name of, titled ’The Political Economy of Time’ which roamed over so many different ideas as they moved forward to defining something.

There was none of the “Prove this, prove that!” that often happens here, just a discussion that moves forward whittling things down, clarifying meaning, getting closer and closer to finding the core, or maybe the truth of something.

So I think I anticipate someone throwing something into the ring that sparks a thought that I can then build on and develop and get a little closer to joining the dots.

Anyway I think I’m on to something else now. Start a poor OP, have it deleted then start a new conversation about the deletion.