Are we sliding into too many political discussions?

Laird said:
Again, I am very late in responding to this, apologies, Sci. I am very open to your idea, with the caveat that I value transparency, so I would like for at least a summary of the decision-making process to be available to the forum community. Your idea would require both David and I (and, potentially, Alex, who, as well as forum host, is its prime moderator) to flag our pending decisions to the other two - one another as well as the third adjudicator. I'm not sure whether David is willing to do that, but I will put it on the record that I am.

Who would you (and anybody else) recommend as the tie-breaker? Are you willing to perform that role? I certainly would trust you with it.
Click to expand...

Heh, I'm not sure I want the job....

Of course you'd need to get @Alex to agree to that structure...

.....Maybe @Typoz is the better pick if he's willing? He seems like a chap who could pull Excalibur from the stone or temper Strombringer* in service to the Balance?

* Artifact of Chaos wielded by Elric:

3558740-elric_the_balance_lost_01_cvr.jpg
 
Hurmanetar said:
I think the crowd is diverse enough they can find someone here to back them up whatever their position may be. And we don't need any delicate snowflakes here anyway. ;)
Click to expand...

Yes! My triple like for you, Hurm. Censorship is never necessary; moderation is maintenance of civility, not about supression of unpopular views.

And being offended by the very fact that paricular topic is being discussed or even questioned is indeed a "snowflakeness" (to call it so).

As for relevance of political discussion - it is fully relevant, since debate of philosophical, spiritual or scientific positions will inevitably lead to the debate of their plolitical and social implications. And these topics will probably arise even earlier, when sociology of science - the most relevant topic for anomalistics! - is scrutinised.

We cannot and should not artificially restrict debate on forum. In fact, it is the width of discussion, compared with tolerance to diverse opinion and mutual politeness, that is the best trait of Skeptiko. If we give this up - either by censoring unpopular (even highly unpolpular) positions or by banishing the whole ranges and fields of topics - we will lose the unique face of Skeptiko.

P.S. In a discussion with my Russian friend and workmate, I sincerely described Skeptiko as "enclave of free thought". I hope that my description will fit Skeptiko in the future as it did fit it before, and censorious and thought-narrowing attitudes will not prevail in the future.
 
Last edited:
Typoz said:
One thing which has changed is this. Some time ago, when Alex needed some ideas, suggestions or guidance on topics, he's come to this forum and share stuff with us. Nowadays, he's much more likely to be outside this site, discussing with those he considers his peers. For better or for worse that has shifted the direction of the podcasts, and left this forum somewhat stranded as an island in its own right, an independent community possibly moving in a different direction.
Click to expand...

He had a chance to debate Pizzagate with Michael M Hughes but he ironically went "full skeptic" and backed away from it as well as pulling the show.
 
Sciborg_S_Patel said:
I agree it's not a left/right thing, in fact it seems pseudo-skeptics have moved toward libertarianism (or always been there) even as you see the left being more open to spirituality.

Agreed on the rest of your points, the equal respect given to conspiracy nutters parsing music videos for Illuminati influence with serious academics only gives opportunity for pseudo-skeptics to turn and say, "See, I told you it was all nonsense."
Click to expand...
Sciborg_S_Patel said:
The challenge is the show itself has become - and seems to be making a greater shift toward - more political?

@Alex seems to be convinced there is a New World Order, though with parapsychology he somewhat entertained critics in a way I've yet to see with conspiracy theories.

I sadly predict this show will go from being a haven for parapsychology academics to a easily dismissed conspiracy site every serious consciousness researcher avoids for fear of having their reputation tainted.
Click to expand...

Vortex said:
Yes! My triple like for you, Hurm. Censorship is never necessary; moderation is maintainance of civility, not about supression of unpopular views.

And being offended by the very fact that paricular topic is being discussed or even questioned is indeed a "snowflakeness" (to call it so).

As for relevance of political discussion - it is fully relevant, since debate of philosophical, spiritual or scientific positions will inevitably lead to the debate of their plolitical and social implications. And these topics will probably arise even earlier, when sociology of science - the most relevant topic for anomalistics! - is scrutinised.

We cannot and should not artificially restrict debate on forum. In fact, it is the width of discussion, compared with tolerance to diverse opinion and mutual politeness, that is the best trait of Skeptiko. If we give this up - either by censoring unpopular (even highly unpolpular) positions or by banishing the whole ranges and fields of topics - we will lose the unique face of Skeptiko.

P.S. In a discussion with my Russian friend and workmate, I sincerely described Skeptiko as "enclave of free thought". I hope that my description will fit Skeptiko in the future as it did fit it before, and censorious and thought-narrowing attitudes will not prevail in the future.
Click to expand...

As for "conspiracy theories" - they range greatly in their validity and soundness, from the most rational and evidence-based ones (9/11 Truth, JFK assasination etc.) to the most speculative and incoherent ones (Pizzagate/Paedogate, global Satanic cabals etc.).

I, myself, feel very sad and disappointed that Alex apparently supports the most baseless "conspiracy theories" out there. But to say that all "conspiracy theories", as such, are not acceptable for discussion is - in my opinion - to manifest "snowflakeness" of a high degree.

We can and should strongly criticise what we think is incorrect assessment of evidence and argumentation. But we should not shy away from any topic.
 
Vortex said:
As for "conspiracy theories" - they range greatly in their validity and soundness, from the most rational and evidence-based ones (9/11 Truth, JFK assasination etc.) to the most speculative and incoherent ones (Pizzagate/Paedogate, global Satanic cabals etc.).

I, myself, feel vewry sad and disappointed that Alex apparently supports the most baseless "conspiracy theories" out there. But to say that all "conspiracy theories", as such, are not acceptable for discussion is - in my opinion - to manifest "snowflakeness" of a high degree.

We can and should strongly criticise what we think is incorrect assessment of evidence and argumentation. But we should not shy away from any topic.
Click to expand...

Well if we got some critics of the show-focused conspiracy theories - which seem to range from "Jesus was a Roman propaganda piece" to "Atheists have made pacts with Satan" - it might be worthwhile?

It seems to me @Alex fears Materialism and the Christian Hell, this has biased the podcasts to favor any silly conspiracy theory that attacks Atheists or Christians.

I don't doubt that there are some conspiracy theories worth examining, but that wasn't really the main reason for the show's existence? It's also not an art history podcast, nor a film review show?

I think the show needs to become clear on what its purpose is, so those of us who aren't interested can take our exits. I for one came for the paranormal + consciousness studies and don't want a bait & switch where @Alex tries to "enlighten" us about his childish fantasies involving the Illuminati communicating through music videos and TV shows.
 
Sciborg_S_Patel said:
Well if we got some critics of the show-focused conspiracy theories - which seem to range from "Jesus was a Roman propaganda piece" to "Atheists have made pacts with Satan" - it might be worthwhile?

It seems to me @Alex fears Materialism and the Christian Hell, this has biased the podcasts to favor any silly conspiracy theory that attacks Atheists or Christians.

I don't doubt that there are some conspiracy theories worth examining, but that wasn't really the main reason for the show's existence? It's also not an art history podcast, nor a film review show?

I think the show needs to become clear on what its purpose is, so those of us who aren't interested can take our exits. I for one came for the paranormal + consciousness studies and don't want a bait & switch where @Alex tries to "enlighten" us about his childish fantasies involving the Illuminati communicating through music videos and TV shows.
Click to expand...
Considering how many years the podcast has been going on, I expect it would be difficult for Alex to continue digging in the same vein. Especially since the whole nature of the podcast is a personal quest. And free. Many times I don't listen to the podcast any more unless it is something that particularly interests me.

I do think it is interesting that we have had a number of guests participate in the forum, but none stuck around.
 
Silence said:
Agreed. The conspiracy theory aspect of Skeptiko is tied for my least favorite with political discussion (for their own sake).
Click to expand...
If we are critiquing, I'm going to say that the softball interview with Jim Marrs was downright really bad.
 
I want to add that changes in Skeptiko forum contents just reflect the general changes in public discourse during the last few years: everything is ever more politicised, ever strongly anti-establishment, and ever more pro-conspiracy.

One would expect the changes of discourse to transform gradually into changes in practice - in outright anti-authoritarian rebellions, for example; ones of the magnitude and intensity which will left behind any anti-globalist protests.

It is time for history and progress to be reborn, even if they would ride the wave of colossal upheaval and outright insurrection following the global crisis of authorities' self-legitimation (and their legitimacy in the eyes of public).

It is not surprising that Skeptiko discourse reflects the general discourse. It would be much worse if we try to isolate ourselves from the changing world.
 
Vortex said:
I want to add that changes in Skeptiko forum contents just reflect the general changes in public discourse during the last few years:
Click to expand...
You mean public discourse used to focus on the nature of consciousness, past lives, near-death experiences, telepathy and psi in the recent past? I must have missed that part.
 
Typoz said:
You mean public discourse used to focus on the nature of consciousness, past lives, near-death experiences, telepathy and psi in the recent past? I must have missed that part.
Click to expand...

No, I meant that until recently, political system was not massively opposed. Now the political confrontations are again prominent.

As for nature of consciousness, past lives, near-death experiences, telepathy and psi - do you think that their wider acceptance is ever possible without serious cultural, semiotic and ideological changes? And that serious cultural, semiotic and ideological transformations are possible without radical social, political and ecnomic changes?

Spiritual revolution will require cultural transformation - that, in turn, will require social reconstruction.
 
Vortex said:
No, I meant that until recently, political system was not massively opposed. Now the political confrontations are again prominent.

As for nature of consciousness, past lives, near-death experiences, telepathy and psi - do you think that their wider acceptance is ever possible without serious cultural, semiotic and ideological changes? And that serious cultural, semiotic and ideological transformations are possible without radical social, political and ecnomic changes?

Spiritual revolution will require cultural transformation - that, in turn, will require social reconstruction.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt all of this is interconnected in some way but it seems to me there's still a core investigation of parapsychology & consciousness philosophy that needs to be done regardless of cultural shifts.

Listeners should be told where the show is going. There was this idea that data was being followed, but now apparently a guy like Lt. Aquino with some goth eyeliner is enough to determine he's a Satanist, and Jesus is a Roman fiction based on a few fringe scholars...

It seems to me if we're really following the data wherever it leads it is more than likely that at times the data leads to places inconclusive and places that are entirely mundane or at the least in agreement with mainstream academia.

Let's not forget I made a conspiracy as good as the Ritual Satanic Abuse one promoted by this show with about an hour's worth of research...
 
Backup Liker 2 the Backup said:
Considering how many years the podcast has been going on, I expect it would be difficult for Alex to continue digging in the same vein. Especially since the whole nature of the podcast is a personal quest.
Click to expand...

There has been more and more of a spectrum between the extreme proponent position and the extreme materialist-mechanistic position, even within academia. Meanwhile Skeptiko is still centered around the narrative of two extremes.

It was a personal quest about following data, if memory serves, not a descent into swallowing convenient conspiracies about atheism & Christianity?

And free. Many times I don't listen to the podcast any more unless it is something that particularly interests me.
Click to expand...

Is being free a complete removal of intellectual responsibility? Well if the podcast + show threads continue to be an embarrassment I'll gladly take my leave but I figured someone should at least raise the concern of how far things have fallen.
 
Sciborg_S_Patel said:
Heh, I'm not sure I want the job....

Of course you'd need to get @Alex to agree to that structure...

.....Maybe @Typoz is the better pick if he's willing? He seems like a chap who could pull Excalibur from the stone or temper Strombringer* in service to the Balance?

* Artifact of Chaos wielded by Elric:
Click to expand...
Thanks - I think there's some sort of compliment in there.

(I was going to add a comment about my tugging at the sword, but it started to sound vaguely salacious, so I'll omit it).

I'm not sure I want to volunteer either. As I mentioned to someone else recently, I seem to be at a point where I'm relinquishing responsibilities, rather than taking up new ones.
 
Sciborg_S_Patel said:
There has been more and more of a spectrum between the extreme proponent position and the extreme materialist-mechanistic position, even within academia. Meanwhile Skeptiko is still centered around the narrative of two extremes.

It was a personal quest about following data, if memory serves, not a descent into swallowing convenient conspiracies about atheism & Christianity?



Is being free a complete removal of intellectual responsibility? Well if the podcast + show threads continue to be an embarrassment I'll gladly take my leave but I figured someone should at least raise the concern of how far things have fallen.
Click to expand...
To be fair to Alex, the christian (Atwell) thing is quite real to him. I don't think it's fair to stand at a distance and say, "That's rather silly." I mean, I personally think there is something to cryptoid encounters. I'm sure plenty of people here would find that ridiculous, but to me it is quite concrete. We can't know what factors combined in his psychology to create his current belief system.

I really consider the podcast and the forum to be two separate entities and I think Alex does as well. He seems not to really give a jot about the forum except that it brings up an occasional idea within the threads on the shows. I don't think he reads the non-show threads. Which is kind of funny really.
 
Sciborg_S_Patel said:
There has been more and more of a spectrum between the extreme proponent position and the extreme materialist-mechanistic position, even within academia. Meanwhile Skeptiko is still centered around the narrative of two extremes.

It was a personal quest about following data, if memory serves, not a descent into swallowing convenient conspiracies about atheism & Christianity?



Is being free a complete removal of intellectual responsibility? Well if the podcast + show threads continue to be an embarrassment I'll gladly take my leave but I figured someone should at least raise the concern of how far things have fallen.
Click to expand...
I think if you want to criticise, you should be a lot less cryptic.

Who is embarrassed by the podcasts? I think perhaps Alex wants to interview the whole spectrum of guests - from the hard-line sceptics, through the really interesting people, out to the rather New Age people such as Tim Freke.

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top