• Announcements

    • Senior Lightworker Lucas

      Message from the office   07/13/2017

      There is an important message from the ULC Staff Office in the Admin Announcements & Maintenance forum. More info is on the way regarding new changes. The new area, Interpath Academia & Scholarship is open for creating new topics. We hope these areas will offer productive and insightful discussion. Please be sure to read the updated ULC Online Forum Statements, Rules & Policies, and the introductory post for each area. 
cuchulain

political correctness and communication

115 posts in this topic

On a different, and more scientific, note; Gilad Feldman, Huiwen Lian, Michal Kosinski, David Stillwell. Frankly, we do give a damn: The relationship between profanity and honesty. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2017 

 

!Spoiler alert! [they] found a consistent positive relationship between profanity and honesty; profanity was associated with less lying and deception at the individual level and with higher integrity at the society level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RevBogovac said:

On a different, and more scientific, note; Gilad Feldman, Huiwen Lian, Michal Kosinski, David Stillwell. Frankly, we do give a damn: The relationship between profanity and honesty. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2017 

 

!Spoiler alert! [they] found a consistent positive relationship between profanity and honesty; profanity was associated with less lying and deception at the individual level and with higher integrity at the society level.

Greetings to you my brother,

 

I personally have no issue with using profanity at all.  You should hear the language that my Men's group often uses (a couple of the members are ex-military and they taught me words I had never heard before:not_i:).  If I owned the forum, and could make the rules, mine regarding the use of certain words would be much more relaxed than what they are here.  

 

However, this forum is owned by ULC.NET, and brother Kevin makes the rules.  It's his playground, and we are here only because he allows it.  It's up to us to either follow the very few rules he sets, or go out and start our own forums.

 

In solidarity,

Rev. Calli

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

41 minutes ago, RevBogovac said:

The very idea of a forum is a "designated space for public expression" so any censorship is a bit of a contradiction in terms, isn't it?

It would only be a contradiction in terms if the definition you cited contained the words "any" or "all." A temple is a place for worship. That does not mean that any given form of worship is welcome in any given temple.

Edited by mererdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Rev. Calli said:

[...] However, this forum is owned by ULC.NET, and brother Kevin makes the rules.  It's his playground, and we are here only because he allows it.  It's up to us to either follow the very few rules he sets, or go out and start our own forums. [...]

 

I can appreciate that, it just seems a bit silly to censor words. I can see why people wouldn't want to see things like personal insults, threats, illegal activity and the likes over here. But individual words... just questioning the status quo a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mererdog said:

It would only be a contradiction in terms if the definition you cited contained the words "any" or "all." A temple is a place for worship. That does not mean that any given form of worship is welcome in any given temple.

 

Nah, we're not talking here about what should be discussed but how it could be discussed... Just seems silly (and a bit like those people giving "the evil eye" to people who are "making the sign of the cross" "wrong" or singing a psalm "out of tune" instead of being happy so many peope are present and celebrating").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RevBogovac said:

 

So there is a distinction then; sure, someone who "owns" the forum/website has a say of what it contains (or not). Still a bit silly to censor any ideas that are spread if the "owner" chooses to have a forum on the website. The very idea of a forum is a "designated space for public expression" so any censorship is a bit of a contradiction in terms, isn't it?

I guess I must think of it as a club and when I am in the clubhouse, I must follow the rules if I wish to remain a club member. I am, therefore, free to disassociate myself from the club if I think the rules are too harsh for me to stay on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Brother Kaman said:

I guess I must think of it as a club and when I am in the clubhouse, I must follow the rules if I wish to remain a club member. I am, therefore, free to disassociate myself from the club if I think the rules are too harsh for me to stay on.

 

That could be a nice comparison. But would it be "the adult thing to do" t maybe first start a discussion with the other club members about those rules? Maybe "innovate" them a bit? And come to some form of "mutual understanding", before running off?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RevBogovac said:

 

Nah, we're not talking here about what should be discussed but how it could be discussed... 

We were also talking about who gets to decide what is on the forum (the whole ownership issue). It isn't me and it isn't you. And censorship involves both what should be discussed and how. When you say censorship is silly, you are talking about everything under that umbrella, intentionally or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

That could be a nice comparison. But would it be "the adult thing to do" t maybe first start a discussion with the other club members about those rules? Maybe "innovate" them a bit? And come to some form of "mutual understanding", before running off?

You may do as it pleases you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

That could be a nice comparison. But would it be "the adult thing to do" t maybe first start a discussion with the other club members about those rules? Maybe "innovate" them a bit? And come to some form of "mutual understanding", before running off?

 

The person who hires the band, gets to pick the music.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mererdog: OK, you got a point there. But still seems silly to censor how someone discusses something (especially when they are proven more honest).

 

@Brother Kaman: Thank you!

 

@Jonathan H. B. Lobl: True, but if he does not pick wisely he might be left with an empty room... (in this example: with 40 unique visitor for his website in the past month).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

The person who hires the band, gets to pick the music.  

 

But the band may not necessarily be able or willing to play it.

 

Ain't analogies fun?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

47 minutes ago, Seeker said:

 

But the band may not necessarily be able or willing to play it.

 

Ain't analogies fun?

 

 

 

I'm not really following you on that one.  It is my firm opinion, that the person who pays the bills, has more authority, than someone who simply joins in.

 

 

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

But still seems silly to censor how someone discusses something (especially when they are proven more honest).

I'm sorry, but a single study proves nothing. And while you may find the morals of others silly, that opinion carries very little weight. I find it silly that people like Harry Potter books. But why would they care what I think about it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mererdog said:

I'm sorry, but a single study proves nothing. And while you may find the morals of others silly, that opinion carries very little weight. I find it silly that people like Harry Potter books. But why would they care what I think about it?

 

One empirical study still proves more than all the opinions in the universe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

One empirical study still proves more than all the opinions in the universe. 

 

One study is suggestive.  It can also be flawed and misleading.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

One empirical study still proves more than all the opinions in the universe. 

It really doesn't. Absent extensive duplication to verify methodology and results, one study proves absolutely nothing. Prior to this process, a study's findings are really nothing more than the opinions of the study's authors. Those opinions may be educated, but they are still opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

One study is suggestive.  It can also be flawed and misleading.  

 

Yes it can, and I am more than open to discussions about the methodology, premises, assumptions, conclusions and so on... But it is stil an empirical study published in a (recent, peer reviewed, highly regarded) scientific journal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RevBogovac said:

 

Yes it can, and I am more than open to discussions about the methodology, premises, assumptions, conclusions and so on... But it is stil an empirical study published in a (recent, peer reviewed, highly regarded) scientific journal.

 

Alright.  A study on censorship?  What were the findings?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

Alright.  A study on censorship?  What were the findings?  

 

You seem to have missed the study in question discussed here...

 

On 7/4/2017 at 10:00 PM, RevBogovac said:

On a different, and more scientific, note; Gilad Feldman, Huiwen Lian, Michal Kosinski, David Stillwell. Frankly, we do give a damn: The relationship between profanity and honesty. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2017 

 

!Spoiler alert! [they] found a consistent positive relationship between profanity and honesty; profanity was associated with less lying and deception at the individual level and with higher integrity at the society level.

 

I only argued that it seemed silly censoring profanity in this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now