What is a Forum

[Master Strategist Kess]

Recently I was given the incredible ability to see the Forum. The Forum, where Caesars would roam, and where Seneca and many other brilliant minds stated their thoughts in a, quite literally, public forum.

I've played role playing games based in old times, where they did not have the joys of the internet, but they had to go to a physical location known as a forum. At these forums people would express their ideas. Some would lecture, as there weren't really formal schools, so this would be a place of education. Forums also allowed intelligent people to gather in order to talk out ideas such as life, death, the afterlife, religion, political theory, etc.

So today, what is the point of a forum? We have the ability to reach millions of people, something the likes of which Socrates, Plato, nor Aristotle even fathomed. We are mostly educated beyond the level of the plebeians during Rome's peak. So in theory we should be able to make a forum far more spectacular than anything seen in the past few thousand years.

However, have we done so? First and foremost, forums are based on either a lecture to educate the masses, or a discussion panel based on a concept. We have plethra concepts pinned upon our forum, so at the very least we have that down. This does not seem a forum aimed towards educating the masses, as I'm sure most of you get that enough in school. From an education standpoint, we're applying knowledge so that we can reach the evaluation level. In other words, we take what we know and have learned, so that we can make value judgements.

Many people have done this, more or less, though I must say I am a little taken back by the fact that when given this forum, a lot of people post one or two lines stating the basics of their belief, supplying no support for it. There are a few noteworthy writers, and quite honestly I implore any who read this to check the autism post as almost every post is an indepth and thoughtful post. However, the biggest crime against forum that has been committed is that people ignore what other people have to say. On the forum on a philosophy for life, almost everyone simply pins up their poster child idea of a philosophy, never commenting on the philosophies of others.

There is an incredible asset in forums, and that is being exposed to a handful of ideas we may not have been otherwise exposed to. These ideas are the little pin ups that people do, but instead of evaluating them, we pass them over, post our little pin up, and move on in our existance. We could instead use these little moments as learning moments, to expose ourselves to knowledge that someone else has found important enough to speak on.

The next thing a forum needs is a healthy amount of philosophers. When you simply post up your two cents, instead of giving us a grand discussion, it really isn't a complimentary moment to claim this a forum. Question things, and post up your support. If you say there isn't a god, tell us why. If you think autism is the pwnzr, tell us why. Should you believe anarchy is the root of all that is good, perhaps read a little Paine, Jefferson, the Communist Manifesto, etc., and support yourself as to why anarchy is a political cure. The biggest problem with anarchists is it seems they desire freedom from literacy and philosophy as well as from government.

Finally, for those of you who read this, and think you're too young, I've had a wonderous line of communication with a boy, Kojima, who though young, questioned what was around him. He didn't have the answers, and to most of what we talked about to be honest all I could do was ask slightly more complicated questions, but he asked them instead of simply stating his opinion on a subject and being done with it. Philosophy is the art of asking the right questions; it's not the art of coming up with the right answer when so often there isn't one.

In short, I'm pondering if we can make this more into a forum, instead of the basic, "This is what I think." We are floundering an incredible resource.  

[Calypsophia]

the Forum you saw was the seat of the Roman Senate, pretty much the equivalent to our Capitol building. it's meant as the seat of government, who's only aim is running the government for a single nation (in Romes case, empire). even earlier in history Athens and even Sparta had something similar. these forums were not filled necessarily by philosophers, but law makers. some of them may have been philosophers as well, or had interest in philosophy and were perhaps deep thinkers, but they were law makers first and foremost. the only reason the Roman Forum is anything spectacular is because of how vast their empire was. the Persian empire didnt have a forum, because they werent a democracy they were a monarchy. and at that time there was nothing to contradict or gainsay the wishes of the monarch. nothing to discuss, his word was law.. unlike Englands Parliament established in the middle ages.  

[Master Strategist Kess]

I realize what I saw, and more it was being used as an anecdote. I suppose that was the history lecture portion of the forum.

Forum

All right, hopefully that clears some things up that seem to have been an obstacle. Now the first and second definitions, as Calypsophia pointed out, reveal the judicial nature of the forum in early times, though these were still used for public assemblies, not just lawmaking.

The third definition would be the kicker, however. An assembly, meeting place, program, etc., for the discussion of public interest, as we seem to put up points we find of public interest in this forum of ours. By no means do I believe we create laws here, but we do post that which we find interesting.

In Rome so long ago, and Greece as pointed out, not all of the politicians were philosophers. However, their forum was not called "Philosophy & Discussions subForum," which our forum is called. Therefore, in lieu of political maneuvering and lawmaking, I would think this forum would have more philosophy and discussing of philosophies. We have a lot of quickly stating one's thoughts on a subject, and pretending that no one else stated anything.  

[Calypsophia]

if I'm understanding you correctly, you're wanting to deepen the discussions put forth in this subforum, as there are many topics of philosophical interest here. am I correct?

the public forums of ancient times.. the 'real life' meeting places, took effort to get to. some had to walk or ride a considerable way to hear someone speak. so I would think one wouldve had to have had a great interest to be willing to make such an effort. nowadays, with the meeting places of the internet, no real effort is involved so it would be more common for those whom such topics dont have great meaning would find their way out of curiosity but not get deeply involved.  

[Master Strategist Kess]

You're right; what was I thinking. Never again will I be duped into going to a philosophy and discussion forum with the expectations of finding philosophy and discussion. Complacency FTW.  

[Calypsophia]

Master Strategist Kess

You're right; what was I thinking. Never again will I be duped into going to a philosophy and discussion forum with the expectations of finding philosophy and discussion. Complacency FTW.

there's plenty of philosophical discussion here, it just seems that what discussion there is isnt good enough for you. that's fine.. nothing wrong with that. some people are so deep minded they need more stimulus. technically, this is an *everything* guild with one subforum set aside for philosophical debate. not a philosophy guild. in this guild you wont find a multitude of seneca's, plato's, socrates'. here's an idea for ya.. perhaps you should expand your guild joining abilities to one completely centered around philosophical conversation and debate. there are plenty out there. one I belong to (joined just recently) called The Stoica. maybe check it out.