Suggestion New rule: premises for discussion

[Hog]

@ Nekodaiden

I did not expect anyone to seriously contemplate the meaning of my previous post.

Thus, I have two questions for you.

01. Did you ever take any advanced math classes beyond Calculus?

02. Have you ever read any books about the philosophy of science. You must have read something about paradigm shifts in science.

 

[Nekodaiden]

First of all, Hog, you need to be aware that tagging people with the @ symbol requires you put their username directly after it, as in @Hog - without the space. That way you can be sure they will know they are tagged.

Secondly, I don't consider either of your 2 questions relevant to either the topic or my response to Andy. Globe earth is a "given" in the West, because that is what is taught from early childhood, through public primary school, and reinforced in adulthood both through language and popular entertainment. All my life I believed in the heliocentric model and globe earth simply because that is what I was taught and was used to. When I first came across a video that questioned it and suggested a flat earth- I thought it was the most idiotic thing I've ever come across. Yet I gave it a chance and looked into it, which is something most people are too chicken **** to do because they are afraid of being thought of as a total moron. I looked into it for over 2 years before I decided that many of the arguments that were being made were very valid and fit reality. That said, the map that came with those arguments I had to reject, because it did not fit reality.

I've already stated publicly on this forum that I am a flat earther and have no shame about that. I get the feeling that your questions are motivated by a desire to determine whether I am a complete idiot that grew up in a cave. Certainly you should know by now that this cannot be the case on my posts.

 

[Hog]

@Nekodaiden

I had no idea that you believe in a flat earth. I apologise for offending you. I will not attempt to change your mind.

I am not a particularly smart individual in the area of math. I have no great insights.

Mathematicians questioned the legitimacy of Calculus. Thus, they developed proofs to show the connection between Calculus and other areas of mathematics. The fact that they questioned the foundations of Calculus before blindly accepting it as true represents a great leap forward in my mind.

The intent of my post was to communicate that animals solve complex problems. They may not think the way that I do. But, it does not mean that I am intellectually superior to animals or anyone else.

Charles Sanders Peirce said that the pragmatic value of a theory is in its ability to predict future events. Consequently, we should not degrade other individuals who think differently.

R.D. Laing once explained how eating meat is evidence of widespread schizophrenia.

Laing and Peirce were the guys who originally helped me realize that eating meat was problematic from an ethical standpoint. I suddenly realized that I am a hypocrite. I still needed another decade to change my ways.

.... But, that is another story .....

 

[Luis Halson]

I didn't use to be a big supporter of detailed and elaborate rules, but some of the more heated arguments here on VF we have seen in recent months have convinced me that our modest set of rules may need to be amended.

To me, part of the problem appears to be that a minority of members have a completely different world-view than the rest, which has unfortuantely lead to some hostile exchanges. I think a small amount of heated debate can make life more interesting and entertaining, but when it's too much it just turns people off. It was with this in mind that I crafted the below draft for a new rule, which I'm hoping you can review and give feedback on. E.g. ideas for improvements (such as language or details to modify, remove or add), or reasons why this would be a good or bad approach:

-----------------

Below is a list of premises we believe have been proven to be true beyond reasonable doubt. They serve as a foundation for further discussions. Therefore, unless it's made clear that the thread starter welcomes discussion on one or more of these, we will delete any post that denies or attempts to cast doubt about the premises. We consider such responses to be disruptive and off-topic.

1. The Earth is a planet, is roughly in the shape of a globe, and is orbiting a star.
2. The Earth is currently in a phase of climate change caused by human activities.
3. There are no successful conspiracies that require the involvement of virtually all governments in the world.
4. Genocides against certain populations, such as the Holocaust, have happened.
5. COVID-19 is caused by a coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) and the virus originated in animals.
6. Soya products do not make you gay or turn males into females.

-----------------

This is a good idea, @Indian Summer, because as you have said, if there is too much heated debate it just turns people off. However, in my opinion, because some people actually believe these things, I think it's unfair to stop them from sharing their opinions. I personally think that instead of banning people from saying these things, all people (whether they agree with these or not) should not be allowed to argue over this.

 

[beancounter]

If I recall correctly, 42 had a thorough science based explanation for explaining why flat earth couldn't exist. It may be helpful to dig it up, if this ever comes up again.

 

[Hog]

Please forgive me Bean Counter. There is a great conspiracy about the number 42. Rumor says that it is a special number with deep scientific and religious significance.

I am only a level one Padawan vegan. So, I do not have access to to this information yet. I will discuss this with Master Yoda in the morning.

May the force be with you Bean Counter.

 

[beancounter]

Please forgive me Bean Counter. There is a great conspiracy about the number 42. Rumor says that it is a special number with deep scientific and religious significance.

I am only a level one Padawan vegan. So, I do not have access to to this information yet. I will discuss this with Master Yoda in the morning.

May the force be with you Bean Counter.

"42" was a member of Veggie Views.

And yes, 42 is the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything.

 

[silva]

"42" was a member of Veggie Views.

And yes, 42 is the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything.

I miss 42, always wondered why they left

 

[beancounter]

I miss 42, always wondered why they left

Well 42 was a young person at that point in life where priorities shift and you take on greater responsibilities. An online forum probably dropped to the bottom of his list.

 

[Second Summer]

Thanks again for everyone's input. My ideas for this have moved on a bit from my initial draft. I think it's too wordy for something that is aimed at addressing a specific problem which may not or should not be central to the day-to-day operation of the forum.

Just to be clear about the draft, though - it wasn't intended to block opinions - except those that may be considered hate speech or would contribute to a hostile environment for parts of our community. It was intended to avoid unnecessary hostilities. You'd still be able to start threads to voice opinions about the supposed flatness of the Earth or the non-existence of climate change, but you wouldn't be allowed to voice those opinions in threads that weren't started based on those premises.

However, what I'm thinking now is that I'd rather just inject some phrases in the preamble (rule #1) to the rules we have already - something along the lines that we want to promote critical thinking and the scientific method. (Maybe also that we want to promote kindness and helpfulness, although that is a different topic.)