Good morning javi. I don't mean to be overly pedantic, but I think it's important to note that the op is clearly and specifically concerned with "discussing philosophical ideas in Private Messages". — Metaphysician Undercover
Exactly. So the response to such a question is abuse? I don't get it. If the thread were in the Lounge, would that make it OK to be sarcastic and disrespectful? (Perhaps so; I never visit the Lounge.) — J
allowing you to escape into a fabricated world of illusion, with a close buddy. Avoid the distractions which reality forces upon you, and really build your own little dream scene. — Metaphysician Undercover
the lounge can also hold interesting discussions, but the topic doesn't especially address philosophy, and that's why it ends there. I recommend you visit it. You will not get disappointed. :wink: — javi2541997
Haven't you said something like "it's not a personal attack if it's true"? Would it be a personal attack or an observation to say that you are a contradicting hypocrite?Pretty much. The usual suspects are here, together with the personal attacks. — Banno
Me too but Banno ends up taking the whole chess board, pieces and all, to play with someone else after we've only made two moves each.As an ideal, I try to consider ourselves not just as learners, but as teachers, which might mean sometimes patience with those who are missing the point. This is to say I'd prefer an open chess tournament, with grandmasters and novices alike. — Hanover
No one was asking for infinite patience. Not responding to posts after we've only exchanged two means you have already reached your limit of patience? :roll:which might mean sometimes patience with those who are missing the point.
— Hanover
Patience is not infinite. — Banno
I'm sure the people you are referencing have come to the same conclusions and no longer participate in your thread in an effort to change your mind, but to inform other, more open-minded individuals the deficiencies of your ideas. I've had some others respond to my response to your post or thread trying to make your argument for you.There are a few who have shown bad faith, and so with whom I usually do not engage - indeed, I don't often read their posts. They are aware of this, but curiously they insist on participating mainly in my threads. — Banno
The only problem with an open discussion is that it can get derailed or split into multiple conversations. — SophistiCat
I think people are making too much of this. — Srap Tasmaner
I fear your OP could be read not just as a suggestion that sometimes direct communication with a poster is helpful for clearing up issues, particularly if the matter is so esoteric that it might not be of interest or ability to others, but as a suggestion that one is better served if they remove themselves from the common man so they can discuss their thoughts among their elite equals. — Hanover
When I try to enforce the terms of the OP on other posters, they are often incensed. — T Clark
↪Banno - It is not a "kindness" to hijack the thread and skip to section 4...
Part of this thread is experimental: are we allowed to have focused reading groups that move at a consistent and controlled pace? Will moderators honor an OP that wishes to do this? If not, then obviously a thread like this is not worthwhile to conduct, and this sort of endeavor is not possible on TPF. — Leontiskos
I think it would be great if the mods enforced intuitive OP-terms, but that thread showed me that they are not willing, or else are not able due to time constraints. I was even PMing one, asking for help. — Leontiskos
But it is unfortunate if it gets to the point where people want to retreat into private messages. — SophistiCat
But I might also invite PM contributions — Banno
Banno is inviting private contributions to a public thread. How would that work? — Leontiskos
I think the invitation is for people to PM if they want to, not that the PM is a contribution to a public thread. So it would work by someone PMing him. — Moliere
it would defeat the point of the website to exclusively do philosophy by PM, perhaps. — Moliere
I don't mind putting my ideas out there for all the reasons thus far stated. But I can see an occasional use for philosophy by PM. One of them being asking someone you know who you share some perspective with to ask them to review their argument and make sure they aren't missing something that they are. — Moliere
And sometimes I really only want to hear one person's take on a particular subject because of some past interaction. — Moliere
I don't think it's so nefarious as you're imputing. — Moliere
Okay, but what is the person who sends the PM contributing to? What does it mean to "Invite PM contributions"? — Leontiskos
Not perhaps, but certainly. No? — Leontiskos
The relationship between the persons. — Moliere
I have no qualms with that. — Moliere
You've switched the topic. You said, "it would defeat the point of the website to exclusively do philosophy by PM, perhaps." I can see that you would have no qualms with someone who only PM'ed, but it does seem to me that the purpose of the website has to do with a forum. — Leontiskos
So an OP which says, "I might also invite PM contributions," is saying, "I might invite some of you to contribute to our personal relationship"? That is a very curious reading. Usually when an OP talks about "contributions" it is talking about contributions to the thread. Surely you see this? — Leontiskos
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.