Originally Posted By: Revlgking


I wonder how our moderators feel about the damaging effect dictatorial paralogisms can have in this forum, especially one dedicated to the nature and function of science, including philosophy about it as in NQSF.

It might be that each person has a mind and the ability to reason beyond superstition and projection.
Without feeling threatened by what another can express freely, moderation comes to be the guiding principal of wisdom rather than reactive and closed minded in making things personal. To perceive the information at the expanded level rather than one from personality, belief and the reaction to personal feelings, one has to relieve themselves of subjective idealism and see the possibility that there is always something greater than any personal opinion, otherwise one becomes complacent and protective of ones own beliefs and opinions and often easily feels threatened by anything that comes into conflict with the personality and those beliefs.

Such a moderator who is personally invested then becomes a Paralogist by dictating what freedom of expression is through the subjective attachment to their own beliefs and idealisms, rather than the objectivity of wisdom that is free from such egoic limitation.

I would suppose the moderator of a forum who was being objective might take someones opinion and set it aside, in and amongst all the other opinions so that something greater might arise from the diversity of belief, giving the option to those who had any stress about feeling left out or unloved to seek their own satisfaction by isolating themselves to something less exposed to the world and its varying degrees of social mores that are strictly intellectual understandings.

It's always a choice to see and project Good or evil, and those ideas are going to be relative to how much one is immersed in belief and opinion, or the objective awareness of the NOW.


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!