get serious

Welcome to the forum

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Advocate
Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

get serious

Post by Advocate »

If Philosophy Now was serious about philosophy they'd be drawing regularly from this forum for topics and authors.
mickthinks
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: get serious

Post by mickthinks »

Huh? It's because they are that they don't.
Advocate
Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: get serious

Post by Advocate »

[quote=mickthinks post_id=480916 time=1605976048 user_id=59]
Huh? It's because they are that they don't.
[/quote]

You're saying they host a philosophy forum that doesn't have philosophical value?
mickthinks
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: get serious

Post by mickthinks »

No. I believe I have a reasonable grasp of what "value" means in this context, but I can't make sense of what the "philosophical" qualifier is doing there.

The forum has value; to me, to others, and to the magazine, I think.
Advocate
Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: get serious

Post by Advocate »

[quote=mickthinks post_id=480918 time=1605976541 user_id=59]
No. I believe I have a reasonable grasp of what "value" means in this context, but I can't make sense of what the "philosophical" qualifier is doing there.

The forum has value; to me, to others, and to the magazine, I think.
[/quote]

If this forum is philsophically meaningful, why would they Not draw from it? You said that wouldn't be serious, which indicates this forum isn't a serious place to draw from.
mickthinks
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: get serious

Post by mickthinks »

Again, I believe I have a reasonable grasp of what "meaningful" means in this context, but I can't make sense of what the "philosophical" qualifier is doing there.

The forum has value. That value doesn't adhere to everyone who posts here, nor to everything that is posted. A much higher standard is set for contributions to the magazine than is set for contributions to the forum.

I don't understand why this is proving so hard for you to reckon with, dude!
Advocate
Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: get serious

Post by Advocate »

[quote=mickthinks post_id=480921 time=1605977865 user_id=59]
Again, I believe I have a reasonable grasp of what "meaningful" means in this context, but I can't make sense of what the "philosophical" qualifier is doing there.

The forum has value. That value doesn't adhere to everyone who posts here, nor to everything that is posted. A much higher standard is set for contributions to the magazine than is set for contributions to the forum.

I don't understand why this is proving so hard for you to reckon with, dude!
[/quote]

A much more academic standard is in no sense a higher one. In any case, i said to draw from, not to copy and paste as is. And there's the matter of finding people who can write good articles as well, not just drawing from things that have been said here.
mickthinks
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: get serious

Post by mickthinks »

But I have said nothing about a more academic standard. It's like you are arguing with yourself. Whatever turns you on, I guess.
Advocate
Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: get serious

Post by Advocate »

[quote=mickthinks post_id=481020 time=1606002843 user_id=59]
But I have said nothing about a more academic standard. It's like you are arguing with yourself. Whatever turns you on, I guess.
[/quote]

The only thing higher about the standards used to choose their posts is in an academic sense. Or more to the point, the "legitimacy" of the author, which is no standard at all.
mickthinks
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: get serious

Post by mickthinks »

The only thing higher about the standards used to choose their posts is in an academic sense.

I can't even parse this sentence. I have no idea what it is trying to say.

If you were hoping to catch the eye of the magazine's talent scouts as an author with "legitimacy", I think you need to raise your game a bit, and I don't mean "raise" in an academic sense.
Advocate
Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: get serious

Post by Advocate »

[quote=mickthinks post_id=481100 time=1606050619 user_id=59]
[i][color=#005000]The only thing higher about the standards used to choose their posts is in an academic sense.[/color][/i]

I can't even parse this sentence. I have no idea what it is trying to say.

If you were hoping to catch the eye of the magazine's talent scouts as an author with "legitimacy", I think you need to raise your game a bit, and I don't mean "raise" in an academic sense.
[/quote]

a) Academically, the authors and subjects that are choosen are "higher" than the average discourse here in their forums, but philosophically they are not higher. In other words, academic thought suffers from certain un-philosophical constraints.

b) I said nothing about myself, nor is legitimacy a valid criteria for higher thought. I'm a better thinker than most of their authors but a worse author than most of their thinkers.
mickthinks
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 1:10 am
Location: Augsburg

Re: get serious

Post by mickthinks »

I'm a better thinker than most of their authors ...

Aaah, now I understand what this is about. Why not come out and say what you mean? : "If Philosophy Now was serious about philosophy they'd be seeking contributions from me."

My answer would still be same.
Advocate
Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: get serious

Post by Advocate »

[quote=mickthinks post_id=481166 time=1606073290 user_id=59]
[i][color=#005000]I'm a better thinker than most of their authors ...[/color][/i]

Aaah, now I understand what this is about. Why not come out and say what you mean? : "If Philosophy Now was serious about philosophy they'd be seeking contributions from me."

My answer would still be same.
[/quote]

You first mentioned me, i didn't. If there is an ego problem here it isn't mine. Also you specifically took only the part of what i said that was most succeptible to negative interpretation, which encompasses several logical fallacies.
Ginkgo
Posts: 2635
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: get serious

Post by Ginkgo »

Advocate wrote: Sat Nov 21, 2020 5:20 pm If Philosophy Now was serious about philosophy they'd be drawing regularly from this forum for topics and authors.
There are at least two authors from this forum that have had articles published in Philosophy Now magazine. Namely, uwot and myself.
Advocate
Posts: 1326
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:27 am
Contact:

Re: get serious

Post by Advocate »

[quote=Ginkgo post_id=481175 time=1606076172 user_id=7624]
[quote=Advocate post_id=480914 time=1605975653 user_id=15238]
If Philosophy Now was serious about philosophy they'd be drawing regularly from this forum for topics and authors.
[/quote]
There are at least two authors from this forum that have had articles published in Philosophy Now magazine. Namely, uwot and myself.
[/quote]

Oh. Good.
Post Reply