Official Petition to Rename Forum

[Pedro I Rengel]

From stupid Non-Philosophical Chat like we're all fucking Hume or something back to Mundane Babble.

All in favour?

[Gloominary]

I was just thinking this the other day.

Mundane Babble is a cool, catchy title, Non-Philosophical Chat is lame.

+ It makes no sense, Non-Philosophical Chat could include all the forums besides Philosophy.

Although I suppose non-philosophical chat could mean strictly non-philosophical chat, whereas say the Science forum is open to both scientific, and philosophical chat about science.

[Mr Reasonable]

my mundane babble is philosophical chat i just think that a lot of people aren't able to see that because they lack the necessary insight

[iambiguous]

Aside from the Philosophy board, the Society, Government, and Economics board, the Science, Technology, and Math board, the Psychology and Mind board, and the Religion and Spirituality board call the rest of them anything you like.

[iambiguous]

my mundane babble is philosophical chat i just think that a lot of people aren't able to see that because they lack the necessary insight

Note a few examples of this.

[Gloominary]

I think we should give iam his own board, call it Dasein Chat.

All posts made about Dasein in the other forums would get moved there.

[Gloominary]

Only kidding, I appreciate iam's talks on dasein, it's good to be reminded of how subjective everything can be.

[iambiguous]

Only kidding, I appreciate iam's talks on dasein, it's good to be reminded of how subjective everything can be.

Since this is will soon be mundane babble, I'll let it go.

But, if this were the philosophy board, I'd have to explain to him [yet again] the distinction between those things that we encounter in our day to day interactions with others that are readily able to be demonstrated as true objectively for all of us, and those things which would appear to be the embodiment of subjective/subjunctive opinions rooted in political prejudices derived from dasein.

Indeed, let him create that thread on the philosophy board. Let him note a set of circumstances in which conflicting goods manifest themselves through conflicting behaviors. Then we can delve into those things able to be agreed upon by all rational human beings as in fact true for all of us...and those things in which both sides are able to note arguments that are reasonable only given conflicting sets of initial assumptions.

For example, Donald Trump is now the president of the United States vs. Donald Trump is a great president. Or the issue can be capitalism vs. socialism or abortion or gun control or any other context in which objective facts are there to be demonstrated... along with subjective opinions regarding right and wrong behaviors.

It's really not a difficult distinction to grasp.

It's just that with the moral and political objectivist among us, there is no real distinction at all. You either agree that their own value judgments are in fact objectively right or you are objectively wrong.

If not a complete scumbag.

[Pedro I Rengel]

But what about genes and memes?

[Gloominary]

Only kidding, I appreciate iam's talks on dasein, it's good to be reminded of how subjective everything can be.

Since this is will soon be mundane babble, I'll let it go.

But, if this were the philosophy board, I'd have to explain to him [yet again] the distinction between those things that we encounter in our day to day interactions with others that are readily able to be demonstrated as true objectively for all of us, and those things which would appear to be the embodiment of subjective/subjunctive opinions rooted in political prejudices derived from dasein.

Indeed, let him create that thread on the philosophy board. Let him note a set of circumstances in which conflicting goods manifest themselves through conflicting behaviors. Then we can delve into those things able to be agreed upon by all rational human beings as in fact true for all of us...and those things in which both sides are able to note arguments that are reasonable only given conflicting sets of initial assumptions.

For example, Donald Trump is now the president of the United States vs. Donald Trump is a great president. Or the issue can be capitalism vs. socialism or abortion or gun control or any other context in which objective facts are there to be demonstrated... along with subjective opinions regarding right and wrong behaviors.

It's really not a difficult distinction to grasp.

It's just that with the moral and political objectivist among us, there is no real distinction at all. You either agree that their own value judgments are in fact objectively right or you are objectively wrong.

If not a complete scumbag.

I tend to agree.

That being said, that the western intellectual establishment neatly places all phenomena into one of just two boxes: matters of fact, and matters of opinion, with (next to) no overlap, is also rather subjective.

The intelligentsia wants to ensure you only think within the facts, never outside them, and every year the list of facts grows larger while the list of acceptable opinions shrinks.

[Carleas]

I'm open to renaming it, but would need to include more candidates in the poll; limiting it to Mundane Babble and Non-Philosophical Chat is arbitrary. There's at least one other name that that forum has worn since being named Mundane Babble (and one I particularly liked, Off Topic).

Mundane Babble is a cool, catchy title, Non-Philosophical Chat is lame.

The off-topic chit-chat forum of every forum created in the early 2000s is called "Mundane Babble". It was a thing. If it ever was cool, it is not cool now. Maybe in a few more years it will be retro cool.

+ It makes no sense, Non-Philosophical Chat could include all the forums besides Philosophy.

Disagree. First, all the forums under the "Philosophy Forums" are philosophical. There is a catch-all philosophy forum for centrally philosophical conversations, but the other forums can be thought of as "philosophy of [forum topic]". It's broad, but philosophy is broad (Jimmy Wales has pointed out that if you keep clicking on the first link in the opening paragraph of Wikipedia pages, you almost always get to the Philosophy page within a half dozen clicks). And the website being named "I Love Philosophy" mostly selects for an audience that wants discussions on those topics with a philosophical flavor.

There are other non-philosophical forums, but I think the "Chat" does the work of differentiating it from them.

[Pedro I Rengel]

Just want to say I for one am open to possibilities as well.

Mundane Babble had the charm of instantly disarming you. You are not coming here to discuss anything serious.

Non Philosophical Chat is dry as a lizard eating croissants.

[iambiguous]

Only kidding, I appreciate iam's talks on dasein, it's good to be reminded of how subjective everything can be.

Since this is will soon be mundane babble, I'll let it go.

But, if this were the philosophy board, I'd have to explain to him [yet again] the distinction between those things that we encounter in our day to day interactions with others that are readily able to be demonstrated as true objectively for all of us, and those things which would appear to be the embodiment of subjective/subjunctive opinions rooted in political prejudices derived from dasein.

Indeed, let him create that thread on the philosophy board. Let him note a set of circumstances in which conflicting goods manifest themselves through conflicting behaviors. Then we can delve into those things able to be agreed upon by all rational human beings as in fact true for all of us...and those things in which both sides are able to note arguments that are reasonable only given conflicting sets of initial assumptions.

For example, Donald Trump is now the president of the United States vs. Donald Trump is a great president. Or the issue can be capitalism vs. socialism or abortion or gun control or any other context in which objective facts are there to be demonstrated... along with subjective opinions regarding right and wrong behaviors.

It's really not a difficult distinction to grasp.

It's just that with the moral and political objectivist among us, there is no real distinction at all. You either agree that their own value judgments are in fact objectively right or you are objectively wrong.

If not a complete scumbag.

I tend to agree.

That being said, that the western intellectual establishment neatly places all phenomena into one of just two boxes: matters of fact, and matters of opinion, with (next to) no overlap, is also rather subjective.

The intelligentsia wants to ensure you only think within the facts, never outside them, and every year the list of facts grows larger while the list of acceptable opinions shrinks.

My own interest here however is in taking whatever "intellectual establishment" one might note out into the world of human interactions. Actual human social, political and economic relationships that come into conflict over value judgments. And, then, through an exchange of moral philosophies that would amount to anything but mundane babble, explore particular aspects of those interactions able to be established as in fact true for everyone objectively...or embedded more in subjective/subjunctive personal opinions that, from my frame of mind, are rooted less in what we claim to know is true using the tools of philosophy and more in what we are able to demonstrate as in fact true for all rational human beings in regard to this part...

For example, Donald Trump is now the president of the United States vs. Donald Trump is a great president. Or the issue can be capitalism vs. socialism or abortion or gun control or any other context in which objective facts are there to be demonstrated... along with subjective opinions regarding right and wrong behaviors.

My arguments here are noted in my signature threads.

[Mr Reasonable]

it should be called "mr reasonable's house of reason"

[MagsJ]

_
I say No.. another option though, perhaps. Though I wouldn’t say no to Mundane Chat.. I dislike the word Babble.

I didn’t particularly like Non-philosophical Chat either.. I thought it rather dull.

[Mr Reasonable]

mr reasonable's house of reason

[Meno_]

I'm undecided, for the following reason:


Gloomy wrote:




"That being said, that the western intellectual establishment neatly places all phenomena into one of just two boxes: matters of fact, and matters of opinion, with (next to) no overlap, is also rather subjective."


>>>>> the matters of fact AND matters of opinion should be altered to 'matters of fact and/or opinion.'

[Pedro I Rengel]

How about "The Alleged Forum"?

[Pedro I Rengel]

Informal Commiseration

-

Harem of Dreams

-

Council of Elders

-

Bread Breaking

-

Safe Space

-

Room Full of Snakes

-

Snake Full of Rooms

-

"No Crack Selling"

-

Shooting The Shit

-

Shooting The Breeze

-

Necrophobic Transmutation

-

Mundane Forum

-

Down Here on Earth

-

Speak Easy

-

a thread for mundane ironists and Other Stories

-

I Love Philosophy but I Love Other Stuff Too

-

Hail Satan

-

SETI

[MagsJ]

_


I’d say that these are good:

- Council of Elders
- Shooting The Breeze
- (The) Speak Easy
- Down Here on Earth
- A thread for mundane ironists and Other Stories


How about:

- Up In The Clouds
- Unload Your Mental Contraptions Here
- ..and Other Stories
- Let’s Get Non-Existential With It..
- The Chat Shack
- The Philosopher’s Inn

[Mr Reasonable]

can we not all just agree on "mr reasonable's house of reason" and move on

[Pedro I Rengel]

Narcotics Team

-

Teen Spirit

-

Laid Back Chat

[Mr Reasonable]

can we not all just agree on "mr reasonable's house of reason" and move on

[Carleas]

Non-Philosophical Chat
Mundane Babble
Off Topic
Mundane Chat
mr reasonable's house of reason
Informal Commiseration
Harem of Dreams
Council of Elders
Bread Breaking
Safe Space
Room Full of Snakes
Snake Full of Rooms
"No Crack Selling"
Shooting The Shit
Shooting The Breeze
Necrophobic Transmutation
Mundane Forum
Down Here on Earth
Speak Easy
a thread for mundane ironists and Other Stories
I Love Philosophy but I Love Other Stuff Too
Hail Satan
SETI
Up In The Clouds
Unload Your Mental Contraptions Here
..and Other Stories
Let’s Get Non-Existential With It..
The Chat Shack
The Philosopher’s Inn
Narcotics Team
Teen Spirit
Laid Back Chat


This is too long to poll (polls have a maximum of 10 options), so we'll need to pare it down. We get pretty close by cutting the names that are clearly jokes or other random nonsense (sorry Mr. Reasonable's House of Reason). It needs to be something that makes the purpose of the forum clear to new members and guests. Cutting what I see as silly, impenetrable, etc., I get:

Non-Philosophical Chat
Mundane Babble
Off Topic
Mundane Chat
Bread Breaking
Safe Space
Shooting The Shit
Shooting The Breeze
Mundane Forum
Speak Easy
The Chat Shack
The Philosopher’s Inn
Laid Back Chat

I'd cut a few others on more subjective grounds:

Non-Philosophical Chat
Mundane Babble
Off Topic
Mundane Chat
Bread Breaking <-- Not clear enough
Safe Space <-- Too charged
Shooting The Shit <-- Swear words
Shooting The Breeze
Mundane Forum <-- Doesn't actually describe the forum
Speak Easy
The Chat Shack
The Philosopher’s Inn <-- Too abstract
Laid Back Chat

So that leaves 8, almost all of which I hate (which has no real bearing on anything, I just feel like we can do better):

Non-Philosophical Chat
Mundane Babble
Off Topic
Mundane Chat
Shooting The Breeze
Speak Easy
The Chat Shack
Laid Back Chat

[Pedro I Rengel]

I hear you.

I don't hate Laid Back Chat.

But no I hear you. For me it's easier because Mundane Babble is both clear, nice, and has tradition to it. But I'll keep working on coming up with something realistic.