• Alkis Piskas
    2.1k

    OK. Thanks for your response.
  • Alkis Piskas
    2.1k

    Thanks for your response to the article.
  • I like sushi
    4.8k
    If people are attracted to threads due to number over responses that is a sad sad sad situation. Makes no sense at all to me. I look at threads based on topic not popularity and assume literally everyone else does too … why wouldn’t they?
  • javi2541997
    5.8k
    I look at threads based on topic not popularity and assume literally everyone else does too … why wouldn’t they?I like sushi

    Well, you are referring to your own criteria. You can't really know what the mind of the rest is or what they are attracted by.

    I simply do not understand why, depending on the person, one thread gets more relevance than the other. It is just strange to me. As you said, people chime in threads because of the topic, like if they were acting objectively. I disagree, using the arguments I mentioned previously. I have evidences that - not exactly but similar - threads about ethics or Philosophy of Language get more attention depending on who the author is, not the content itself.
  • I like sushi
    4.8k
    That could just be down to quality. Maybe popularity is a thing. People are stupid so it happens.

    The younger people are the more they want to be heard and the more attention they seek.
  • javi2541997
    5.8k
    I came back to this important thread and I reread all the answers. The main point that we discussed last year was why some threads were more active than others. I think we could say this has got better than before because there is a nice balance and most of the threads are active, and many members are very involved with them.

    Yet I have to share another issue that is limiting me to having a good discussion, or from enjoying posting at least.

    It is well known that there are members whose native language is not English. I am not the only one, and I acknowledge that inside the group of non-native speakers there are some whose level is high and others (myself) are not that precise or good.
    This fact has never been a good deal, and I mostly enjoyed my presence here, posting mainly in The Shoutbox.

    But when I try to discuss with another member of a serious topic, the interlocutor accuses me of not having a great level of English instead of focusing on the main topic of the OP. I personally don't know whether this is posted with mischief or my lack of 'fluency' is actually the cause of not performing a good discussion.

    I wish I could know. I want to improve and maintain 'fruitful' discussions.
  • Outlander
    2.1k
    I personally don't know whether this is posted with mischief or my lack of 'fluency' is actually the cause of not performing a good discussion.javi2541997

    I think it's likely the chastiser believes you are not absorbing or fully understanding the deeper subtleties and "theme" or argument of certain complex, multi-faceted topics.

    I consider myself highly proficient in English and there are many topics that I struggle to properly grasp in full on first read. Or in layman's terms, that fry my brain. I majorly use this site in betwixt other PC work and so have the main part of my brain "occupied" with whatever it is I am working on and as a result prefer simpler, shorter more general philosophy type topics like the ones @Shawn often posts. I look at my brain as something of a multi-range oven. Most life tasks and many threads here I can easily multi-task with "one burner" per se, however many require me to have to "clear the range" and intensely focus on specifically, word for word, concept by concept, to even begin to get a vague picture of. And even then I find myself having difficulty and the need to ask superfluous questions to make sure I'm even in the right ballpark mentally with what I conclude the poster is conveying or intending to convey. In short, don't feel bad. There are many high level discussions of concepts here that are difficult to understand, even by those who introduced them. Don't be afraid to ask questions. But also don't feel discouraged by the fact that some discussions will simply be at a higher level of understanding and proficiency than is currently possessed.
  • javi2541997
    5.8k
    Thanks for the feedback, Outlander.

    I do not feel scared to ask questions when I don't understand something, and even at The Shoutbox my posts are often proofread, something that I am grateful for because it helps me to keep improving. I also have had the same feeling as yours in some threads. When I read them I feel lost the first time, so I need to reread again or even use DeepL to translate some parts.

    But this issue goes deeper than just that. I have the feeling that some users accused me of being non-native with bad manners, with the aim of derailing the main topic. Whenever I try to make arguments, I personally believe that I do my best.
    Then, it is not possible to keep a 'good discussion' if the other interlocutor is already biased on my lack of fluency. I think this should not matter at all. If we are debating, let's say, about Kierkegaard's works, we should focus on this topic. Our level of English is accessory.
  • unenlightened
    9.2k
    But when I try to discuss with another member of a serious topic, the interlocutor accuses me of not having a great level of English instead of focusing on the main topic of the OP. I personally don't know whether this is posted with mischief or my lack of 'fluency' is actually the cause of not performing a good discussion.

    I wish I could know. I want to improve and maintain 'fruitful' discussions.
    javi2541997

    Let me say immediately, that I find your posts very often fruitful and improving; actually those are more roles the same thing, I think — the fruit of a discussion is surely a change of mind for the better. And having to try and communicate with one who is struggling a little with the language forces one to be more simple and clear if possible, which is always a good thing, but also makes one rethink for oneself ideas that may have become stale.

    But my first thought, reading the above, was that there is an unfortunate tendency to make a discussion into a competition. It's not exactly mischief, but it does tend to undermine what I see as the purpose of discussion. To the extent that one aims to win, one has lost sight of the proper function of communication, which is the development in the community of truth and understanding.

    It is easy to score points against someone who is less fluent, and 'prove' them to be wrong. But such behaviour does not look good to anyone else. It looks cheap and egotistic, like beating a novice in chess. I once tried to write some philosophy in French, and it came out like a treatise for primary school, but not a very good one. So I have great admiration for anyone who tries to communicate seriously in a second language, because it is hard enough in one's native language.

    In general, I don't think there are special rules that apply to discussion that don't apply to other interactions; respect, kindness, honesty, an intention to both teach and learn as much as possible. Sometimes. as has been pointed out, silence is the best expression of that, but universal silence would be unproductive, and that might suggest that popular threads need more silence and unpopular ones more posts, but other times silence can indicate that there is not much (more) of value to be said.
  • javi2541997
    5.8k
    But my first thought, reading the above, was that there is an unfortunate tendency to make a discussion into a competition. It's not exactly mischief, but it does tend to undermine what I see as the purpose of discussion.unenlightened

    Although that is not the common behaviour among the users, yes, I usually felt some threads go on that way. It seems like a competition for who is right, or more specifically, who is the one who gives more 'strong answers'. This is very difficult to reach inside the nature of philosophy. Even the forum says: 'start a new discussion'. It is obvious we are here to discuss different opinions.

    And having to try and communicate with one who is struggling a little with the language forces one to be more simple and clear if possible, which is always a good thing, but also makes one rethink for oneself ideas that may have become stale.unenlightened

    I agree with this. I understand that if I force others to be more considered of me for not being native, I am at the risk of reducing the quality of the conversation. Exactly in this context, I have to admit it is my fault if I can't seriously follow him with fluency. But, being honest, I hardly experienced this. When I read a thread and I feel it is too complex for me, I decide not to dive into it. I only tend to post wherever I feel comfortable and ready to have a fruitful discussion with others. Nonetheless, it is obvious that philosophy is very complex itself! Imagine it in another language when even translation can change the sense. Crazy and beautiful at the same time!

    In general, I don't think there are special rules that apply to discussion that don't apply to other interactions; respect, kindness, honestyunenlightened

    True. But, again, most of the people are quite nice here. Yet, I wanted to share my thoughts because I felt that maybe the language is a tougher barrier than I ever imagined.
  • javi2541997
    5.8k
    #2

    I hope you don't take me wrong, but it is fascinating what occurred to me a half-hour ago. I wrote an email to Alkis in English, and in most cases, when the text is done, I like to check the grammar on web pages to make sure I don't make mistakes. When I pasted my original text to the grammar check corrector, the 'bot' or 'AI' answered: Congratulations! Your message is well written, no mistakes detected!
    I couldn't believe so. I checked the text twice and yes, zero grammatical mistakes on my side.

    What does happen then? Does artificial intelligence lie to me? Doesn't the bot or AI detect grammar mistakes from a non-native speaker? I have been drastically criticised for my poor English here. First, in the short story competition, and then in some threads. Very hard to follow, badly written and bla bla. It was clear (according to some) that those posts and short story were written by a non-native speaker, but that's a lie, and lying is bad. How did you know if they were corrected by a grammar checker?

    I was debating with a malicious user about what a paradox is. I tried my best at debating, but the discussion was over because I was not comfortable typing in English, according to him. Here is when the malicious user gets trapped in his own ignorance. It is impossible to say to me that I am not comfortable debating in English if my texts are proofread by a grammar checker. But, I get it. I know I will keep reading similar comments if someone does not agree with me in the future. It is just some of you behave and post with malice.

    So, it will not be possible to have a good discussion, because there are folks acting with twisted manners and malice. Be cautious!
  • unenlightened
    9.2k
    I was debating with a malicious user about what a paradox is. I tried my best at debating, but the discussion was over because I was not comfortable typing in English, according to him. Here is when the malicious user gets trapped in his own ignorance. It is impossible to say to me that I am not comfortable debating in English if my texts are proofread by a grammar checker. But, I get it. I know I will keep reading similar comments if someone does not agree with me in the future. It is just some of you behave and post with malice.javi2541997

    Some people will take any opportunity to make themselves feel better by making others feel worse. And even the mods cannot protect us from that entirely. I lived in France for a few years and was always the stupid foreigner. My proudest moment was once to be mistaken for a Belgian - a stupid alcoholic French-speaking foreigner. I felt I had conquered the language. But it's not just grammar, there is a rhythm and music, and idiomatic references that one can get wrong.

    For example there is a running joke in one comedy series where an Italian, whenever there is a pairing of things, gets them the "wrong" way round - raining dogs and cats, kidney and steak pie, at it tongs and hammer, ... there are thousands of these pairings in English that always go in a certain order Jack and Jill, never Jill and Jack. An AI is unlikely to correct such things because there is actually nothing wrong - but they sound foreign.

    As to 'paradox' that is easy enough for anyone to misunderstand, almost to the point where to understand it would be paradoxical. :groan:
  • javi2541997
    5.8k
    An AI is unlikely to correct such things because there is actually nothing wrong - but they sound foreign.unenlightened

    I agree. The AI is unlikely to correct or proofread 'argot' or slang words. It just proofread basic grammar sense with the aim of making my paragraphs sense. But I wasn't referring to this specifically. It is obvious that I always sound 'foreigner' because I have a lot of hiccups in English when I type. One of the main issues which burdened me the most is the difference between 'in', 'on' and 'at'. We just have one word in Spanish to include all those three: 'en...' etc. And other aspects related to gender, conditionals, the bloody 'going to' instead of will, etc.
    (Estoy yendo al taller = I am going to the workshop.
    Iré al taller luego... = I will go to the workshop later on...)

    But I don't attempt to be a snowflake. Those tricks in English end up being controlled after years of practising and reading in English.

    My point went deeper than just that. I personally felt that my posts were, let's say, senseless because of the criticism of my grammar. But never mind any more! Just malicious users typing twisted posts!
12Next
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.