Staging Area for New Threads
(I've been thinking about making this thread for a long time. If @Jamal or the mods think it is unnecessary or inappropriate for any reason, they are welcome to delete this thread.)
This is a thread where you can stage threads. Oftentimes a tangential topic arises within a thread and many of the participants can see that a new thread would be the best place for the tangential topic. Still, given that there are a handful of people involved in the discussion, it often feels presumptuous to begin a new thread on your own, framing it as you wish without the input of the other participants. Of course one could go to a PM to stage the new thread with the tangential topic, but the staging discussion is essentially public, not private, and a public record of the staging is all to the good.
I suppose one could also use this thread to stage a new thread that is not based on a tangential discussion. Or to propose a thread and see if anyone would actually be interested in discussing it. Or to gauge interest in a reading group, etc.
(Example to follow...)
This is a thread where you can stage threads. Oftentimes a tangential topic arises within a thread and many of the participants can see that a new thread would be the best place for the tangential topic. Still, given that there are a handful of people involved in the discussion, it often feels presumptuous to begin a new thread on your own, framing it as you wish without the input of the other participants. Of course one could go to a PM to stage the new thread with the tangential topic, but the staging discussion is essentially public, not private, and a public record of the staging is all to the good.
I suppose one could also use this thread to stage a new thread that is not based on a tangential discussion. Or to propose a thread and see if anyone would actually be interested in discussing it. Or to gauge interest in a reading group, etc.
(Example to follow...)
Comments (10)
Step 1. Identify the thread and tag those who are participating in the tangential topic.
Thread: The End of Woke
Participants: @Antony Nickles, @AmadeusD, @Fire Ologist, and perhaps @Count Timothy von Icarus and @Joshs
Step 2. Propose or query the idea of a new thread as a means to framing the issue correctly and fairly. Proposing thread titles will be especially helpful. Optionally, one may wish to open a discussion about whether a new thread is necessary.
Hey guys, judging from posts like , , and , it looks like we might have a tangential topic arising within the thread, "The End of Woke." Would it be worthwhile to split the tangent off into a separate thread? If so, how should we frame the new topic? [Insert Leontiskos' starting point for framing the issue here]
...I will actually give a truncated starting point for framing this tangential topic. If I had more time I would write something a bit longer...
The tangent seems to be related to intractable disagreements and how to navigate them. It pertains to the move wherein one implores their interlocutors to shift to a meta-level in order to clarify more fundamental issues or disagreements.
If we did want a new thread for this tangential topic, here are some possible titles. Please add more:
1. Situating goals and interests within practical reason
2. What is the relation between understanding and judgment?
3. How do we argue across differing paradigms?
4. How do we situate interests within political debates?
5. How do we navigate intractable disagreements?
6. Is it possible to navigate intractable disagreements? Do they exist?
[Note that the starting point that @Leontiskos is offering may be highly biased towards his own way of construing the tangent, which is precisely why the Staging Area could be useful.]
I'd like to propose another thread, where we can stage ideas which we may or may not want to bring into this thread to discuss whether we want to create another thread for them? Do you think that someone would start another thread after that, to discuss whether certain ideas ought to be entered into my thread?
Depending on the results the poster would then decide if the work is worth the effort.
Example:
I believe that the earth is flat and would like to present the reasons I have for discussion. :rofl:
Right, and I was thinking more in terms of breaking off a tangent from an existing thread, but it could also be used to survey interest in an altogether new topic. :up:
I just wanted to make this thread available for future use.
But I figured I'd share it now.
Nice. I might be interested in that reading group. I will download the chapter and give it a look. :up:
It's set up like Euclid's elements and then has commentary, and there are a number of free translations and commentaries. Really a classic, and a way to see a vastly different conception of causality than the current mechanistic paradigm.
But there is something for everyone because Proclus has a lot of logical innovations, which were sort of lost over time. I have a good book that looks at this, for instance the classification of existence as a scalar ("Themes in Neoplatonic and Aristotelian Logic Order, Negation and Abstraction" by John N. Martin) although I wasn't planning on getting too much into all that.
For taste:
Confusing? That's why we'll discuss it! It was written in a context where students were expected to study Aristotle first as preparatory, before going through the Platonic dialogues with their commentary tradition, so in being compact it assumes some things, but that can be clarified.
I would give reading that a shot. I like that it involves a text without making it a part of other texts, even as it is written in the context of other authors in that vein.
Cool, I am traveling the next two weeks so I'll probably start won't start it for a bit at any rate. IIRC its 212 propositions total, and normally just a paragraph for each of them. We'll see how far we get. Some are more bridge propositions, and probably don't admit of as much discussion. I'll try to figure out what would be a good translation to use that is up online, there are several.