Forum purpose not clear

How can we improve this forum? Do you require any assistance?
User avatar
Lhamo
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by Lhamo » Tue Jul 12, 2016 10:13 am

SarathW wrote:We have to clarify the difference of debating, arguing and investigation.
I think we should debate or argue for the purpose of investigation and clarification.


==============
verb (used without object), argued, arguing.


1.

to present reasons for or against a thing:
He argued in favor of capital punishment.


2.

to contend in oral disagreement; dispute:
The senator argued with the president about the new tax bill.

============
Debate is contention in argument; strife, dissension, quarrelling, controversy; especially a formal discussion of subjects before a public assembly or legislature, in Parliament or in any deliberative assembly. Debate is a method of formally presenting an argument in a disciplined manner.

=========
investigation


/ɪnˌvɛstɪˈɡeɪʃ(ə)n/


noun

noun: investigation




the action of investigating something or someone; formal or systematic examination or research.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=argu ... g#q=debate
I think, the differences are clear, aren't they?
So, please clearyfy: what do you want to express with this post? Do you refer to my suggestion of different subforms for either investigation or debate?
Or what are you refering to exactly?
ImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Lhamo
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by Lhamo » Tue Jul 12, 2016 10:15 am

Nicholas wrote:...
I am not suggesting 'flame wars' are cool, but craving safe places, whether physical, intellectual or verbal is infantile. We are made of much sturdier stuff.

If critique should lead to something usefull, there is more needed than the patience of the one who is being critisized. Also the one who spreads the critique, has to show some genuine interest in the topic. This isn't the case very often in online-discussions.

Example:
Green Subforum:
Member A, OP: "The trees are green. This is because of chlorophyll. Which functions does chlorophyll have?"
Member B: "No, trees are red."
Member C: "With chlorophyll the leaf is able to accumulate energy. Light-energy is transformed into sugar-energy. This is called photosynthesis."
B: "No, this is superstition! Nowhere in the bible you can find any proof about this so-called photosynthesis!"
And so on...

I am convinced, due to experience, that such topics go nowhere than downhill only. What is needed in such a conversation is not the endless toughness of members A and C, but a friendly "Shut up and get informed" to member B.

:namaste:
ImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Nicholas
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 8:21 pm
Location: California

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by Nicholas » Tue Jul 12, 2016 1:52 pm

Lhamo,

Having mods hovering about and telling folks to 'Shut Up' in order to enforce 'friendliness' and 'harmony' is exactly what I do not wish to see here.
Wholesome virtuous behavior progressively leads to the foremost. -- Buddha

AlexMcLeod
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 1:41 am

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by AlexMcLeod » Tue Jul 12, 2016 1:59 pm

Lhamo wrote:I am convinced, due to experience, that such topics go nowhere than downhill only. What is needed in such a conversation is not the endless toughness of members A and C, but a friendly "Shut up and get informed" to member B.
Unfortunately, the topic of conversation would require an enlightened being as a moderator to fulfill that function. And since only another enlightened being would be able to determine via only online presence that someone is enlightened, that seems a little far-fetched as a requirement for a mod.
There is no Emotion, there is Peace;
There is no Ignorance, there is Knowledge;
There is no Passion, there is Serenity;
There is no Death, there is the Force.

No_Mind
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2016 1:54 pm

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by No_Mind » Tue Jul 12, 2016 3:18 pm

Lhamo wrote: Member B: "No, trees are red."


I am convinced, due to experience, that such topics go nowhere than downhill only. What is needed in such a conversation is not the endless toughness of members A and C, but a friendly "Shut up and get informed" to member B.
But what if B is correct in his own way? (Assuming B lives in a place where trees have red leaves year round, not only in fall)

Image
May the Force be with you

User avatar
Lhamo
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 1:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by Lhamo » Tue Jul 12, 2016 6:14 pm

No problem at all, if he writes: "Where I live, the trees are red."

In additon to that he shouldn't denie the existence of green leafs. Especially he should respect the Green Subforum and refrain from denieing their experiences, because he is otherwise disrupting a fertile discussion there. :mrgreen: You know, "it's not easy being green".
ImageImageImageImage

WaterDragon
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 11:56 pm

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by WaterDragon » Tue Jul 12, 2016 7:32 pm

Lhamo wrote:
Rick O'Shez wrote:...

I would also suggest introducing a clear "no-debate" rule for the tradition-specific sub-forums. I think it would be best to reserve these for exploration and respectful discussion, creating a safe space for each tradition and removing the the risk of argument and sect-bashing.

A sub-forum for debate could easily be added.
Very good suggestion.
There has to be some place, where the traditions can be explained and discussed peacefully, otherwise the topics cannot be developed with the due respect. At the end there's nothing to compaire, since every knowledgeable person left.
Comparing discussions need even more caution and respect, otherwise no exchange of views can take place.

So, I find it very skillful to have areas for hot discussions and areas for peaceful conversation as well.
This. It's counterproductive to have subforums dedicated to specific traditions, if they become targets for people wanting to bash those traditions. Learning and sharing can't take place in a hostile atmosphere.

WaterDragon
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 11:56 pm

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by WaterDragon » Tue Jul 12, 2016 7:39 pm

Nicholas wrote: Debate is an ancient respected tradition within & between all paths; only in the last 20? years or so have pablum speech codes begun to be advocated. The Tibetans (or somebody) have a saying, "If you will not defend your views or beliefs, you must not care very much about your religion."
.
Adherents shouldn't have to defend their tradition on a sub-forum dedicated to that tradition. They go there to share with co-followers of the path, exchange perspectives, ask for elucidation of this or that doctrine or interpretation, to seek info about the tradition, and the like. Hijacking a discussion like that by attacking the tradition is exactly that--thread hijacking, if not downright trolling. The discussions adherents want to have simply cannot be had in those circumstances.

Maybe we could compromise by saying that people who want to critique a tradition start their own thread on that topic, instead of hijacking an existing thread to dump their disapproval and judgmentalism onto it.

User avatar
Nicholas
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 8:21 pm
Location: California

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by Nicholas » Tue Jul 12, 2016 8:02 pm

WDragon: Adherents shouldn't have to defend their tradition on a sub-forum dedicated to that tradition.
Just your assumption, may be an unwarranted one. David The Admin may clarify, but I get the impression that the sub-fora are a place for anyone to ask about, post about etc. not just for adherents.

So far, this is all The Admin David has written about the intent of Dharma Paths:
It is a pan-Dharma forum, encompassing all Dharmic and contemplative traditions. User names are allowed for those who want to keep their anonymity and debates are allowed.
This forum is affiliated with dhammawheel.com and dharmawheel.net however unlike the two DWs, here one can engage in comparative religion discussions and debates.
I have posted to many non-Buddhist fora here, because I find value in many paths, yet I took formal Triple Jewel refuge in 1979.
Wholesome virtuous behavior progressively leads to the foremost. -- Buddha

User avatar
Nicholas
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 8:21 pm
Location: California

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by Nicholas » Tue Jul 12, 2016 8:24 pm

One more thought; if one does not want to read an annoying or hostile poster, just avert your eyes. If that is too simple, then go to your User Control Panel and find the Friend-Foe section, type in the offending member's name as a Foe and all posts of that person are blanked out.
Wholesome virtuous behavior progressively leads to the foremost. -- Buddha

WaterDragon
Posts: 58
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2016 11:56 pm

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by WaterDragon » Tue Jul 12, 2016 9:43 pm

Nicholas wrote:
WDragon: Adherents shouldn't have to defend their tradition on a sub-forum dedicated to that tradition.
Just your assumption, may be an unwarranted one. David The Admin may clarify, but I get the impression that the sub-fora are a place for anyone to ask about, post about etc. not just for adherents.

So far, this is all The Admin David has written about the intent of Dharma Paths:
It is a pan-Dharma forum, encompassing all Dharmic and contemplative traditions. User names are allowed for those who want to keep their anonymity and debates are allowed.
This forum is affiliated with dhammawheel.com and dharmawheel.net however unlike the two DWs, here one can engage in comparative religion discussions and debates.
I have posted to many non-Buddhist fora here, because I find value in many paths, yet I took formal Triple Jewel refuge in 1979.
Yes. No argument there. Again, the point is that hijacking a topic for the sole purpose of criticizing the tradition is a hijacking. If anyone wants to critique, let's say, Theravada, they can start a thread in that sub-forum to present their view. Or they can critique it in their own tradition's subforum, as, say, a compare-and-contrast topic. No one is saying those shouldn't be allowed.

Lhamo's proposal of a dedicated sub-forum for controversial topics is also an option; people choosing to participate there would know they're entering a "Danger Zone" as I think one Buddhist forum calls it. But for people seeking a pleasant, insightful exchange regarding a teacher's explanation of doctrine, say, or a recent essay by a teacher in their tradition, it would be inappropriate for someone from another tradition to start aggressively making hostile posts denigrating the tradition and declaring it not legitimate.

This is one aspect of the questions the OP raises: is the purpose of the forum to decide what dharmas are legitimate and which ones aren't? Is that a valid or accepted trajectory for an ecumenical forum like this? Clarification is needed.

User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 2371
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 6:36 pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by DNS » Tue Jul 12, 2016 10:38 pm

For debates one can start threads and make posts in the 'General Dharma comparisons' sub-forum and we could always move over some heated topics to this sub-forum. As for the other sub-forums, we have not made any rule against debates there yet, it is still an ongoing formation of this forum and this can be changed if needed.

User avatar
anjali
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 5:05 am

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by anjali » Fri Jul 15, 2016 3:53 am

There has been some discussion about whether this forum should be "Dharma Paths" vs "Religious Paths". There is a worthwhile distinction between the two.

Here is a decent working definition of religion that I've used from time to time: "Religion is that system of activities and beliefs directed toward that which is perceived to be of sacred value and transforming power."

There are a number of interesting definitions for Dharma, depending on tradition. Here are a couple of classic definitions from Hindu Dharma. The first is from the Mahabharata:: "Dharma has been explained to be that which helps the upliftment of living beings. Therefore, that which ensures the welfare of living beings is surely Dharma. The learned rishis have declared that that which sustains is Dharma."

The second is a quote by Krishna from the Bhagavad Gita: "Dharma sustains the society. Dharma maintains the social order. Dharma ensures well being and progress of humanity. Dharma is surely that which fulfills these objectives."

So, clearly this is a distinction between "Religion" (what's sacred/transformative) and "Dharma" (what promotes upliftment/well being). How that distinction can help focus on dharmic discussions instead of religious discussions (and distinguish this site from other comparative religion sites) is unclear.

No_Mind
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2016 1:54 pm

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by No_Mind » Fri Jul 15, 2016 4:40 am

Dharma and religion, are they the same .. are they not the same? Long before this thread I used to meditate on a koan - can we call hotdog a wurst sandwich (leaving condiments like mustard aside are they the same)?

Hotdog is a cooked sausage, traditionally grilled or steamed and served in a sliced bun as a sandwich. Wurst is German for sausage and wurst sandwich is sausage served in form of a .. err .. sandwich.

Unable to solve that koan, I am currently meditating on -- is a sub same as a hoagie. There are fine points of distinction .. a sub is not sliced all the way through but a hoagie is (or is it the other way around).

Dharma and religion, sub and hoagie .. so many koans, so little time ;)
Last edited by No_Mind on Fri Jul 15, 2016 12:17 pm, edited 3 times in total.
May the Force be with you

SarathW
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:59 am

Re: Forum purpose not clear

Post by SarathW » Fri Jul 15, 2016 5:04 am

I think, the most suitable name could be "The net of all views"
Considering the fact that now we have a forum for paganism as well.
However, this name does not make any sense to most people.
We need a catchy praise for a forum while it closely represent the content.
Do you know why it called an "I phone"

http://www.iphonejd.com/iphone_jd/2009/ ... phone.html

So you always come up with a reason for the name.

I am quite happy with the name Dharma Paths.
Perhaps David will remember as the first person who gave a new meaning to Dharma.
:meditate:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests