Renaming the "Skeptic vs. Proponent Discussions" subforum

[Laird]

Please forgive me if I'm putting you on the spot or seeming to interrogate you, Chris, but:

I don't think characterising one side as "opponents" is a good idea

What do you make of the idea that this is a matter of perspective: that both sides have positive positions and that in terms of those positions, whether one is a "proponent" or an "opponent" depends on how the position in question is framed (e.g., a "proponent" of atheism versus - identically, but from a different perspective - an "opponent" of theism)?

If the discussion that is pointless and disruptive could be confined

Oh, but the intent is not for the discussion in that forum to be pointless and disruptive. That said, ideas for how to eliminate pointless and disruptive discussion are very, very welcome.

What do you make of the idea that this is a matter of perspective: that both sides have positive positions and that in terms of those positions, whether one is a "proponent" or an "opponent" depends on how the position in question is framed (e.g., a "proponent" of atheism versus - identically, but from a different perspective - an "opponent" of theism)?

I don't think "proponent" is likely to be understood in that way on this site.

It's difficult. Maybe it could be called "Debates about basic viewpoints" or something along those lines. (Though that phrase sounds pretty horrible.)

[Laird]

Maybe it could be called "Debates about basic viewpoints"

Or simply "Debates and challenges", with "about basic viewpoints" being left implicit.

I should add my own perspective on the 'proponent / opponent' idea. In my experience I may find myself under either heading at any time, or moving among/between them. It isn't like signing up for membership of some political party, and giving lifelong allegiance to just that one party, come hell or high water. The whole point of discussing things is not to reinforce deeply entrenched positions, and hence solidify them, but to have an open-minded debate where different ideas may be shared. The idea of choosing sides seems to belong on the sports ground perhaps, but in the quest for extending our knowledge, then releasing one's grip a little, playing around with different ideas, toss them in the air and look at them from different angles, that is the real point. Getting a multi-faceted view of things. If we can achieve this, collectively if not individually, then something of value is generated.

How about "Multi-Faceted Discussions"?

"Pro Psi vs. Anti Psi"?

I warm to psi whenever I get a whiff of a mechanism and really hope max is on to something. 

Laird mentioned the philosophy of the original skeptics earlier. 

I think I am one of very few posters that keeps all the major ontologies on the table. I consider that to be a badge of ancient skepticism. Conversely, the defining feature of a proponent on this forum appears to be a position of anti-materialism. Often vehemently so.

So how about ‘anti-materialist vs more open-minded folk’?

How about "That Which Can Not Be Named"? Or does it sound too Lovecraftian?

[Laird]

How about "That Which Can Not Be Named"? Or does it sound too Lovecraftian?

Or maybe too Judaic? (I'm not a reader of Lovecraft though, so can't comment on that).

"That Which Can Not Be Named" seems to encapsulate the instant in time at which we find ourselves in this thread. I don't think it represents the end-point of this discussion.

Why not opt for something simple such as "Opposing Views"? The nature of the forum itself defines the subject matter so we don't need to be specific.

I like the first one but here are a few random suggestions. 

Rounds vs Squares. 
Blues vs Reds
United vs City
Truth vs Lies
Good vs Evil
God vs The Devil
Harpic vs Germs