Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Meta

Welcome to the staging ground for new communities! Each proposal has a description in the "Descriptions" category and a body of questions and answers in "Incubator Q&A". You can ask questions (and get answers, we hope!) right away, and start new proposals.

Are you here to participate in a specific proposal? Click on the proposal tag (with the dark outline) to see only posts about that proposal and not all of the others that are in progress. Tags are at the bottom of each post.

Comments on How do we encourage answerable Philosophy questions?

Parent

How do we encourage answerable Philosophy questions?

+6
−0

Philosophy is an academic discipline and also a more informal conversational pursuit. How should the Philosophy community be structured to support and encourage answerable objective questions and discourage forum-style subjective conversations?

Questions like "how does $theory define good and evil?" seem, to this layperson, to be objectively answerable, but questions like "what are good and evil?" feel broad, opinion-based, and large. What guidelines should be put in place? What would potential reasons for closing be? How can we build a strong community of people seeking knowledge?

This is not my field, so I welcome help in refining this question. It seems like the first couple questions in the incubator are struggling, and I don't know if this is because there's assumed context (that non-philosophers aren't aware of) or if the questions need to be adjusted (how?).

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

2 comment threads

Same thing? (4 comments)
I’m currently tired, and sketching some thoughts in response, to stimulate further discussion, while ... (8 comments)
Post
+3
−0

The main problem isn't subjectiveness IMO - many philosophers would already object there and ask what knowledge that isn't subjective. But rather the risk of too many overly broad questions. To be reasonable, questions must have a somewhat specific scope (like on the rest of the Q&A sites). I think some of the posted questions in the Incubator struggle with this indeed and they are perhaps not good examples of questions suitable for the site.

If you just toss a broad question out there such as "what is the meaning of life?", then there are hundreds of different philosophy branches all with their own take on it. And answers can't reasonably cover all of those.

However, if every question would be enforced to poll for answers given a certain philosophy/philosopher, then maybe that's needlessly narrow-minded and too academic.

I can also easily see how debates and argumentation back and forth should have a prominent place on a philosophy site. Perhaps have a special "Discussions" category for such? Where questions need not be answerable or have one true answer. Codidact is already far more suitable for this kind of setup than SE, given categories and threaded comments. The only concern I have there is that it would probably require a lot of attention from moderators.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

I agree that "what does philosophy X say about Y?" is too narrow and boring. I think we'll have a mo... (3 comments)
I agree that "what does philosophy X say about Y?" is too narrow and boring. I think we'll have a mo...
Monica Cellio‭ wrote 8 months ago

I agree that "what does philosophy X say about Y?" is too narrow and boring. I think we'll have a more vibrant community if a single question can draw answers from a variety of perspectives. How do we get manageable variety -- several but not hundreds? Or is "hundreds" ok with the right tooling, sort of like how Code Golf challenges are quasi-tagged by language?

The idea of a "discussions" category separate from the main Q&A is interesting, and I agree that this platform has better affordances for that than SE does. I wonder what else we'd need to make that manageable.

Lundin‭ wrote 8 months ago

Monica Cellio‭ How is all of this handled by the Judaism and Christianity communities? They are really quite similar in terms of questions about existentialism and morality, and there's not necessarily some "one true answer", no matter if you consult different parts of holy books or if you consult different philosophies. Is it OK to ask completely broad and open-ended questions on Judaism/Christianity? For example like some questions that were posted on the incubator here: "Is colonialism bad?", "When is it ethical to kill?"

Monica Cellio‭ wrote 8 months ago

Lundin‭ I can speak more solidly for Judaism. Questions like that are inherently scoped "according to torah/halacha", and we do get answerable questions like that. Because there are different traditions, we also sometimes see questions narrowed to one of them ("according to X, ...?"). Judaism has an established corpus of core sources (and a whole lot of other sources on top of those), so there are places to start.

Christianity has at least some broad questions, like this one, though I don't see anything in a casual look that's as broad as these examples. Questions there will have the same kinds of inherent scoping as on Judaism, though I have the impression (as an outsider) that they have more variations.