Lots of truth to that! I’m suffering from that too 
“Such a forum”? What is it about this forum that makes it “such a forum”? Ah, the members. Urwrong said the members are stupid and that’s the problem. So what we need is some super-pretentious academia types gracing the board and for us simpletons to get out of the way.
The only thing lacking in any one of us to be called a peer is indoctrination and sesquipedalian dialect. 
Yeah he’s no where near snooty enough to be called professional. 
There are plenty of forums around and it is likely that they suffer from the same problem. There are also plenty of trolls around and I do not think they make things any better. One could start their own forum and see if it arrives at the same situation.
I think ILP is great.
How can it be a waste of time to be a leader and produce content?
Even assuming “nobody here is far enough above-average”, one of the most valuable things in the real world is to become familiar with how non-versatile thinkers react to your content because they make up the majority of the world in which you have the potential to be a leader and manifest the content that you can produce. I come here to test out arguments on whoever has an interest in philosophy - I’m sure I don’t have to try hard to convince you that the usual kind of people you come across in the offline arena are both ill-equipped and uninterested in deep thinking.
You reveal a lot about why you’re here through saying what you have said. You’re here to alleviate boredom, you wish to learn from leaders and content producers or at least be inspired by others rather than through your own means, indicating that you acknowledge at least some lack in your own ability to create - potentially the real reason why you don’t produce content here, for which you are perhaps making excuses and blaming others rather than yourself? I’ll leave that one to you, I don’t like to assume. It’s not anyone’s job to entertain you, and personally if I were uninspired by a place, without skipping a beat I would just think more on something that was interesting me by myself until it was worth sharing, or time to see what others think about it initially independently of my input.
I don’t produce frequent content here, but I do produce it when so inspired. I don’t force it or post half-baked ideas just for the sake of frequency of content production. Nor do I, for one, fall into the category of “not far enough above average”, as you seemed to cotton onto in the gun thread. Being officially in the top 1-2% in IQ I am instead used to being the most intelligent person in the room, and I would hazard a guess that most others here are at least above average on the same scale - sure there may be one or two below, but I wouldn’t be surprised if at least one or two were on the same level as me or maybe even higher. I’m not saying quality philosophy and creativity are necessarily implicated by intelligence, but I don’t think there’s much doubt that they are at least somewhat correlated. For me, it’s basically all I’ve thought about, constantly for half my life. I think you are a little quick to judge this forum so sweepingly.
To Urwrongx1000,
Philosophy Now Forum produce their own paper with interesting articles usually written by the sort of people you are promoting to drive this Forum, noted writers, philosophers, academics.
Granted there are some very interesting topics presented on their Forum, but I have noticed that the interest to respond is thin compared to topics created by the riff raff (LOL).
Perhaps a visit to that Forum is long overdue, you may enjoy yourself immensely and be taken seriously.
I already have, countless times. I dominated this board for a long period of time, and still do, whenever I find the inclination to return.
It’s a waste to be a leader to lambs, when you could be a leader to lions.
Unfortunately that’s not true, with philosophy. On this forum particularly, mostly degenerates are attracted to here, and I am the opposite.
Most, here, are too deeply embedded into the old dogmatic humanist ideologies, Judaeo-Christians, Abrahamic.
To most here, “world” means human-centric, purely from the inside of human civilization. To me, however, “world” means far, far beyond human walls.
My “world” is all Existence, to the “end” of the universe.
The forest is always empty if a plague has ravished all the life within it.
No, my problem is that I’m wrong and there are no philosophers around to show me the errors of my ways, leaving me alone and responsible for my mistakes.
I’m very open to discussion. But few have ever been willing. I have the track record to prove it. I pressed for countless debates, never received anybody willing.
Yes
I’d prefer young intelligent females, but, they’re non-existent in philosophy.
On the contrary, the “academic” or “professional” philosophers are a lot worse than those on this forum, and other forums. I’ve been inside the walls of academia. That “philosophy” is built on pure theory and conjecture. Dusty tomes. Tombs. Dead philosophies, discussed until the end of time. They are lifeless catacombs, filled with the living-dead.
The philosophy I’ve always aimed for, always, is living philosophy. Flesh and blood philosophy. Real wisdom.
Here’s the thing. If any human on this planet had a genuine interest in Philosophy, then they would be here, or have passed through here already. So my threads are like a net, waiting to catch some of them.
Those who are honestly philosophical, will come here without instruction, without being led. They will have come of their own accord and determination.
Because they “love philosophy”.
Your standards are very low.
It’s more a waste of time when there’s no interaction, or that you have to wait 10 or 20 years, before your content receives the adequate attention. Philosophy is an artform, and so suffers from latency. Like “rediscovered” artists after they’re long dead, paintings resold for hundreds of thousands of dollars. They were “nobodies” while alive. Death made them valuable. So their works could be taken, stolen, passed around, much easier.
That’s how philosophy works too. Philosophers are “rediscovered” after death. So their ideas, words, thoughts, can be striped, stolen, passed around to the general public.
Like how it is with Nietzsche.
Lol, no, conversing with morons is like philosophizing with a child. It’s not difficult. It’s rather easy to push and pull others around (philosophically), by force if necessary.
Well, I mainly want to see another leader/content producer, as I have done in the past. I don’t want to be the only one doing it, around here. And those who are most vocal here, keep spamming the same ideas, thoughts, conversations, the same routines. So this is a goad into the direction of “new” areas, if possible. However the versatility I speak of, maybe only possible with new blood, new faces, new minds.
People become quickly invested in their (flawed) ideologies. They cling onto mistakes, even after exposing it to them, philosophically.
I have a lot of experience here. I’ve used another username before. So this isn’t my first rodeo.
As mentioned above, I’m not looking for “academic” or “professional” philosophers, per se.
And I’ve already tested the metal of Philosophy Now forum. Very unimpressed.
I can’t see you following the lead from anyone.
You have zero respect for most of the human race. There is one person though who you seriously debate with and in some ways respect, perhaps you could return there for an indefinite period.
I always thought carefully before replying on that Forum as there are some interesting questions raised, different perspectives, the difficulty there is maintaining some sort of longevity without being thrown into the dungeon, or gagged. I can’t recall the reason you left.
He didn’t leave, he runs the dungeon there. He’s currently slumming it with his net casting skills.
I respect highly intelligent and reasoned thinkers. Because reason is the one trait, if any at all, that truly separates man from beast.
It’s unfortunate to see so little of it.
You speak of reason, yet you offer me no reason for your opinion on my standards being very low.
Gloominary has released several topics that are on the fresher side and Joker, aka Zero_Sum, has several current events topics threaded. Prismatic is adding material in the Religion section, otherwise, it’s real slow around ILP regarding newer ideas.
I do wonder why it is slow around here at the moment.
Life seems to be more agenda driven in this technological age than ever before, philosophers are following suit rather than broaching expectations.
I think that philosophers are trying too hard to shape public perceptions of current events, that they too are caught up in the demanding times with a sense of a larger responsibility to all of humanity rather than operating independently of the current cultural climate. Philosophy itself has become entrenched in a media driven sense of responsibility for common man’s every perception, to save the unsavable. Philosophers of today have become town criers.
Yes, that is true and I would add that agenda driven life may be robbing your life of authentic conversations.
Philosophers tend to work backward from a deliberate, desired future - a bit like business and government. Wishing for total alignment and engagement with a particular philosophy, I think has now become counter-productive and rules out innovative philosophy.
So when you walk into a situation with your own agenda and the rest of the age is engaged in a common agenda then your work becomes more difficult.
I dont even know if I am making sense for crying out loud.
How often do folks engage in authentic conversations anymore without an agenda? Just to see what develops? And how do you gauge and incorporate highminded thinking into everyday interactions?
en_de,
What’s the current common agenda?
If you are leader and content producer, then problem solved? 
Can you lead lions? It seems as if instead of being doctor to the sick, you want to doctor the healthy. If anyone needs leadership, it’s this stinking lot 
What attracts the degenerates?
Yeah I was born into it. I know what you’re saying… I’d like to stumble upon a congregation of Asian Buddhists or Indian Hindus just to switch it up, but I’ve found no such group. Every group is christian or anti-christian.
Maybe at the onset of an argument you should define your terminology. Semantics is often a stumbling block to discussion.
Good one Well, in that case it’s time to plant some seeds!
Well it’s like that discussion you and I had about “freedom = free from laws”. You seemed determined to assert the overarching validity of that statement even if it meant shooting down my objection that “freedom” must be defined differently than what most people imagine it to mean.
Most folks associate freedom with not being attacked by random roving gangsters and it’s law and order that mostly-guarantees that freedom, but if you define freedom as being free from law, then you’re going to be right by definition, but wrong by every other definition and popular conception.
I just wanted a “oh yeah, good point”, but instead you seemed to pound the table harder and dig in. So maybe people don’t want to debate you because it’s a game they have no shot at winning. You will always find some way of skirting the statement, “oh yeah, good point!” At least throw people a bone.