Qingjing jing

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
And obviously the mods felt the same way.....i wonder how that happened, no bias atall, obviously.

Maybe a yoghurt post, that would bring culture to the thread hahaha.



Since you have the say on what is culture and what is not, prey tell....what are we allowed to post in the culture forum ?

Pray tell how you think it moved and what the bias is. If you alert the yoghurt post I imagine it will be moved.

In answer to your question, you're not allowed to post anything because you're too busy being a sulky grump.

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
And obviously the mods felt the same way.....i wonder how that happened, no bias atall, obviously.

Maybe a yoghurt post, that would bring culture to the thread hahaha.



Since you have the say on what is culture and what is not, prey tell....what are we allowed to post in the culture forum ?

Stop whining. If you think the yoghurt thread shouldn't be there, warn it.

I actually read that thread as a critique of discussion about musical tastes or of art in general. Sometimes, when someone asks something like "what is the best (...) of all time?" I answer: Straciatella. Because it's my favourite ice-cream flavour.

Originally posted by Palynka
This is an artificial distinction. Religion doesn't not necessarily imply institutionalization.

I know several followers of Christ that do not follow the institution. Are they not religious? Yet they consider themselves so. Examples like this abound.

It's not artificial at all. Religion does imply institutionalization, otherwise it would be a purely personal series of beliefs. Christianity is an institution, like it or not, it carries the history, precepts and traditions of an institution and even if your friends do not go to church or have some personal way of worship, they are part of a religion which has been institutional for centuries.

Originally posted by Starrman
It's not artificial at all. Religion does imply institutionalization, otherwise it would be a purely personal series of beliefs. Christianity is an institution, like it or not, it carries the history, precepts and traditions of an institution and even if your friends do not go to church or have some personal way of worship, they are part of a religion which has been institutional for centuries.

Again, this is an artificial distinction.

If a thought ccan carry out the history, precepts and traditions of institutions then no set of beliefs would not be institutionalized. It's not coeherent. The dependence of the institution must be current or it is meaningless, else we run the risk of claiming everything is institutionalized.

Originally posted by Starrman
Pray tell how you think it moved and what the bias is. If you alert the yoghurt post I imagine it will be moved.

In answer to your question, you're not allowed to post anything because you're too busy being a sulky grump.

I am asking an honest question, and while this thread is in a forum consisting of mainly intelligent people, i'd be more than glad to hear your response.

Why is a Philisophical text written hundreds of years ago, not culture ?

I think there will be a few billion chinese who think it is. Also, considering the forum contains 7 threads, the alerting of the post was , quite frankly, childish.

Does Thom Yorke have to write it before it is allowed ?

Originally posted by Palynka
Again, this is an artificial distinction.

If a thought ccan carry out the history, precepts and traditions of institutions then no set of beliefs would not be institutionalized. It's not coeherent. The dependence of the institution must be current or it is meaningless, else we run the risk of claiming everything is institutionalized.

Nonsense, institutions thrive on the lack of current dependence, they operate through tradition, not through application to the present.

I have no idea what you mean by 'a thought can carry out'.

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
I am asking an honest question, and while this thread is in a forum consisting of mainly intelligent people, i'd be more than glad to hear your response.

Why is a Philisophical text written hundreds of years ago, not culture ?

I think there will be a few billion chinese who think it is. Also, considering the forum contains 7 threads, the alert ...[text shortened]... post was , quite frankly, childish.

Does Thom Yorke have to write it before it is allowed ?

You just posted a long piece of spiritual text (philosophy maybe, but clearly spiritual) and you offered no supporting question or encouragement of debate. In some ways it's akin to the spam which ivanhoe posts regarding what the Pope says, and whilst I don't think it should be deleted as it's not a regular thing, like ivanhoe's papist message service, it could be seen as pointless.

There's a forum for spirituality already, are you claiming the text is not predominately spiritual? If you've got a point to make about the text and the cultural ramifications, why didn't you make it? I alerted it purely because I honestly think would be more correctly placed in spirituality. It seems the mods agree. If I start a post which someone thinks is better placed in another forum then they should alert it too. If you've got a problem with the decision taken by the mods, stop crying about it like a little girl and send them feedback. Getting prissy because your post got filed somewhere else, now that is childish.

Originally posted by Starrman
You just posted a long piece of spiritual text (philosophy maybe, but clearly spiritual) and you offered no supporting question or encouragement of debate. In some ways it's akin to the spam which ivanhoe posts regarding what the Pope says, and whilst I don't think it should be deleted as it's not a regular thing, like ivanhoe's papist message service, it dback. Getting prissy because your post got filed somewhere else, now that is childish.

You see, that is where you and i disagree.

One, i don't think anything in this forum, except maybe paedos posting filth, is worth bothering the admins about. I'd rather discuss in open forum, without harassment and badgering if possible.

And two, I believe that a poem, regardless of it's subject matter, does not need a debate to make it culture. If a picture of the Crucifixion of Christ was linked in the forum, in a new thread and without comment, That is still culture. Art, the written word, intelligent text written by an intelligent man, meant to be enjoyed and thought over by intelligent people....that sounds like culture to me.

I don't need to add anything at the end of a body of work, for it to be culture. Well done to those who dictate and censor culture.

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
You see, that is where you and i disagree.

One, i don't think anything in this forum, except maybe paedos posting filth, is worth bothering the admins about. I'd rather discuss in open forum, without harassment and badgering if possible.

And two, I believe that a poem, regardless of it's subject matter, does not need a debate to make it cultur of a body of work, for it to be culture. Well done to those who dictate and censor culture.

😴 If you had intended it as a poem, you should have mentioned it. Most people will have no idea about it as a literary work. Now if you think you've got a case, take it to the mods and get it reinstated.

Originally posted by Starrman
😴

You should post that in the culture forum, it seems to be at the right level 😛

Originally posted by Starrman
😴 If you had intended it as a poem, you should have mentioned it. Most people will have no idea about it as a literary work. Now if you think you've got a case, take it to the mods and get it reinstated.

Why should i have to add anything to a body of work for it to be considered culture ?

The person who alerted it had no idea about culture atall, he was obviously just a mindless peon, who wouldn't know culture if he was smacked about the face with a copy of the War and Peace.

I will alert, and will see what happens. Quite a sin that the most lively cultural debate since the forum's inception, happened outside the culture forum....don't you think ?

While there was an obvious spiritual content to the post, it was presented in the form of a poem. So it should have remained in the culture section which deals with art and literature, and other cultural forms of expression. Posters could have discussed the hortative quality of the poem; the mantra-like effect of repeating words and phrases; the binary oppositions of turbidity and purity, being and non-being, heaven and earth, and how this subverts (or emphasises) the nothingness and non-being and the ineffable of Taoism.

Obviously there will be overlaps between the spirituality and culture forums. However, the posts should be different: in the Culture Forum the emphasis should be on the literary/artistic/cultural dimensions; in the Spirituality, posters might instead focus on the propositional content (Does this poem make sensible and coherent statements about reality? Is it compatible with my spiritual beliefs?)

And will poems by Gerard Hopkins about the Virgin Mary be moved to the Spirituality section, too? If someone wants to talk about the occultism in William Yeats' poetry, must they too post in the Spirituality Forum? If so, what is the point in the Culture Forum?

Originally posted by huckleberryhound
Why should i have to add anything to a body of work for it to be considered culture ?

The person who alerted it had no idea about culture atall, he was obviously just a mindless peon, who wouldn't know culture if he was smacked about the face with a copy of the War and Peace.

I will alert, and will see what happens. Quite a sin that the most l ...[text shortened]... l debate since the forum's inception, happened outside the culture forum....don't you think ?

I'm hardly a mindless peon, but you're right, I had no idea about the text. I understood it to be predominately spiritual in nature. If you want to discuss the literary aspects of it please do, but I still maintain both that initially (and due to the lack of additional posting) I considered it to be best placed in the Spiritual forum, and that if you stopped whining and sent feedback you might see a result.

Oh and by the way, I wouldn't consider any body of work you produce to be culture, no matter how much you add to it 😛

Originally posted by Conrau K
While there was an obvious spiritual content to the post, it was presented in the form of a poem. So it should have remained in the culture section which deals with art and literature, and other cultural forms of expression. Posters could have discussed the hortative quality of the poem; the mantra-like effect of repeating words and phrases; the binary oppo ...[text shortened]... y, must they too post in the Spirituality Forum? If so, what is the point in the Culture Forum?

Which is why there should be some initiation of debate or something don't you think? Not everyone will be aware of the content of all cultural entities which might be posted there, we need to share ideas and knowledge. Perhaps I was a bit hasty in alerting, we'll see if it is reinstated.

Anybody remember this kind of discussion back right after Spirituality was created and separated from debates? Anybody notice that almost all philosophical discussion takes place on Spirituality? (If I want LJ or Starrman to sort me out on the correspondence theory of truth, or get Dr. Scribbles to sort me out on logic, where will I post my question if I want them to see it and respond?)

It’ll sort itself out as we go, with the occasional bicker along the way.

Personally I suggest that any topic is OK for Culture—as long as the post is composed in iambic pentameter... (Do I need to say, “Just kidding”?)