Debating should be allowed on this site as long as the debate does not turn into a heated argument. It is very challenging to Debate sensitive issues without becoming angry. I have to wait to calm down after the fire rushes to my head in order to not seem disturbed in an out of control manner.
The Monks over in Tibet have debating contests. I think it is an excellent anger management tool. Especially when we have the option of editing our words before posting them.
Iām guilty of stirring the pot on a few occasionsā¦
anyways, people do seem inclined to discuss everything on here. To me thatās the sign of a real community.
This is however a forum about schizophrenia. People lose sight of that. We should be talking about what we all have in common and not things which will put us at odds with each other.
Itās inevitable though. Itās also nice to get oneās opinion on something out there and to find like minded people.
Over time though if your thinking about it properly you learn what to say and what not to say.
I still say that this is a forum For aand About szā¦evident because of the different categories I think mods and such should be a bit more tolerant and maybe adress people who are āstirring ā ā ā ā upā like you and me, privately to sort things out when discussion/flaming gets too extreme
BarkingDog, conforming to humanity (lol)
Thatās putting a lot more work on them to have them sort it all out personally. The flag system works pretty well also just calling for a thread to be locked via the @(modās name) mentioning.
Glad to see your back on here.
still think they should be āseen and not heardā more than they are now. maybe moving delicate topics to the correct categories and such. (which I know they do)
The private thing is when they intend to ban a user, a more progressive method I think is justified
No lashing out at mods intended. just trying to be productive
Thatās because you keep getting yourself banned lol
Seen and not heard?! The most active moderator on this site suffers from the same illness as the rest of us!
I know, lol, but last time I wanāt even toldā¦ which I think is pretty arrogant still, I think anyone who gets banned deserves an explanationā¦ This forum was a big part of my daily life, and will be again (sorry guys/ettes, lol)
Well thatās a nice qualification for a moderator
if I was a mod, this outta be moved to beta
A debate based on rational facts is fine. Debates based on beliefs are more problematic as weāve seen with the religious and anti-psychiatry stuff that swirls around this community. Since Iām guessing youāre referring to a locked thread, a debate that runs along the lines of "we are running the planet just like they said in The Terminator movie is going to be a problem unless you also produce facts from outside of the movie.
No matter how much I enjoy Crank 2 with Jason Statham, telling me that I can ārechargeā my pacemaker just like Chev Chelios ārecharged his heartā in the movie using sundry and various external electrodes will earn you nothing more than a horse laugh. I need to get cut open every 8-10 years for a battery replacement. Doing what is shown in the movie would either stop my heart, cook my heart, or cause my pacerās battery to explode (according to pacemaker clinic staff who I asked out of morbid curiosity).
Pixel.
Yes, we do need moderators on this forum. All forums Iāve been on have rules. I think when they lock the threads, it is like ringing the bell to end round two or three, deciding by how much time is spent on arguing our own negative views.
I think some people insist on posting in a way that will get a thread shut down despite copious evidence of the likely outcome of their behaviour.
If your winning, itās called a debate.
If your losing, itās called an argument.
source: my ex.
And the key word here isā¦ beliefs. I say that because beliefs are at the core of our illness. We do not see, hear or feel āactualnessā all that well.
(And actually, most people have some degree of inability in that regard. Is the concept of āreality testingā is more of social convention inside the box of the mutually agreed āconsensus tranceā than a measure of multi-sensory connection to what is?)
Yes, I do have a (hopefully useful) point. And it is this: One can train oneself to be in better multi-sensory connection with what is. One could start with the currently popular Ekhart Tolle or Jon Kabat-Zinn, but there are gobs of ātraining manualsā out there these days.
I love Eckhart Tolle, though I think one should be moderately healthy before reading it. I was in the grips of a violent psychosis when I read him. I would cut my Mom off when she started talking about tomorrows plans and say āMom, what day is it? Today.ā Like I was big ā ā ā ā because I read Eckhart Tolle and I āknew everyone was outside of the Nowā.
I still read him occasionally, but as I get healthier I agree less and less with some things he says. I do think you have a great point about actualness. Thatās something I barely feel. Problem is I donāt know how to get there.
Iām a Christian, and I do believe there is a future (not concrete) and God wants us to think about the future at times.
I think a debate is more formal and usually has rules.
Iām trying to spend more time living in the land of the probable and less in the land of āpossible, but improbableā. That, and Occamās Razor is the beeās knees. I use it to slice everything, including my luncheon meat. (But not my wrists, Iām past that stage, thankfully.)
Pixel.
[quote=ānotmoses, post:15, topic:27346ā]
And the key word here isā¦ beliefs. I say that because beliefs are at the core of our illness. We do not see, hear or feel āactualnessā all that well.
[/quote]I think that we donāt always stay transfixed in actual awareness because we are too busy trying to become what we aspire to be instead of the actualness we always revert back to as the default mode. Realizing that we have that common ,presumably, but at varying times of our days. And I think we also maintain that ādelusional possible realityā along with the actual one at all times just to have an escape mode in place. Is this a good description of what you are describing?
A debate is simply a arguement without emotional interference and considering that we are a little off balance naturally there should be more consideration to this.
I mean someone (pixel) shutting things down on a whim seems kinda short sighted.
Iāve had my account suspended for a few days because I was belligerent and insulting to another member which I can fully appreciate.