Renaming the "Skeptic vs. Proponent Discussions" subforum

I’m not sure where that leaves posters like max, who think these phenomena exist but have developed a well-argued, workable (if disputed) mechanism.

Alternative Views?

But yeah not having the word "Skeptic" is likely to cause more confusion than clarity.

[Ninshub]

I leave Sisyphus at the foot of the mountain. One always finds one’s burden again. But Sisyphus teaches the higher fidelity that negates the gods and raises rocks. He too concludes that all is well. This universe henceforth without a master seems to him neither sterile nor futile. Each atom of that stone, each mineral flake of that night-filled mountain, in itself, forms a world. The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.

 -Camus

(We could also insist we need to change the name by a certain date or the forum name will be deleted completely, OTOH maybe just change it to THE FORUM THAT SHALL NOT BE NAMED)

(We could also insist we need to change the name by a certain date or the forum name will be deleted completely, OTOH maybe just change it to THE FORUM THAT SHALL NOT BE NAMED)

OR - If we don't negotiate a deal on a new name ("deal" meaning you all accept the new name "Proponents vs Covfefe")  then we have the power to rename it unilaterally because this is clearly a forum emergency.

OR - If we don't negotiate a deal on a new name ("deal" meaning you all accept the new name "Proponents vs Covfefe")  then we have the power to rename it unilaterally because this is clearly a forum emergency.

Ord-der!! Ord-der!!

Seriously tho, "Skeptic's Corner". 

It allows for rough-and-tumble discussions that might cross multiple views such as "NDEs offer verdical reports but have an explanation that doesn't include an afterlife" to "NDEs show survival after death but don't show us anything about what an actual afterlife is like"  to the more expected skeptical positions.

Admittedly "Skeptic" here is going to be contextual, but the context will at least be in-line with what most who read about parapsychology would expect.

"Corner" works because one reason for having the sub-forum, if not THE reason, is to allow for discussions that don't always veer back to the "Does this stuff even exist?" argument.

[Ninshub]

Part of the motivation behind the idea for the change was indeed to get rid of the "Skeptics" label, as Laird intimated in his earlier post up thread, so to my mind it doesn't make sense to change it to something else that retains that label. I say leave it as it is if we can't agree on anything else.

Part of the motivation behind the idea for the change was indeed to get rid of the "Skeptics" label, as Laird intimated in his earlier post up thread, so to my mind it doesn't make sense to change it to something else that retains that label. I say leave it as it is if we can't agree on anything else.

I agree w/ Laird's arguments about the way Skeptic is used today compared to the Ancient Greek meaning of the term, but I think it's something we have to live with in context of the way people use the term in the very circles parapsychology is discussed in.

If I leave this forum and talk about "skeptics", most will assume I am talking about a group that largely consists of "physicalists" and "materialists" who also deny Psi exists.

But we can get rid of the "Versus" part, which I think is unnecessary.

I don't mind the word 'sceptic' appearing in the title. I have more difficulty with the fixation which seems to afflict many suggestions, the use of the Latin 'versus', (against). How about using the word 'and'? Take the phrase "pros and cons" as a model if you like, drop whatever labels you like in there, to me it implies a meeting of minds, rather than conflict and separation which seem inherent in 'versus'.