Sometimes I have a philosophical question. So I want to ask it in philosophy stackexchange. Then I type something in the title line and there are similar questions, that makes me question my own question. Then I try to render my question more precisely, giving me new proposals, I try to render my questions even more precisely and so on. And at the end I resign and do not ask any question at all. I understand that it is necessary to restrict the number of questions when dealing with platforms with more restictive definable topics (e.g. stackoverflow). So duplicates can be prevented, and users will faster find a solution. But in my option, it does not make any sence, to do the same procedure with philosophical questions, because every question is too unique and every view of any individual is too unique, than it can be formalized in any way.

Should I rather use art, to express my love to philosophy?

  • Don't bother it just a matter of time until they block you from asking a question. Like how i found out about my account today hehe. weird site.
    – Dasem
    Sep 30 '21 at 0:40

From our help center

You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.

This does not fit well with what is usually called "philosophical questions". Actually, it shows that this site is part of the StackOverflow/StackExchange network and not some random philosophy forum.

Thus, I would say that if your goal is to ask (=discuss) philosophical questions, this site is not the best place to do so.

  • 4
    You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    – user4894
    Mar 30 '21 at 21:22
  • 1
    @user4894: Bravo.
    – CriglCragl
    Mar 31 '21 at 3:34
  • @user4894 Hey, don't shoot the messenger! 😝
    – Philip Klöcking Mod
    Mar 31 '21 at 4:43

In the spirit of refinement and rigour, your (@Philip Klöcking) statement that: "Thus, I would say that if your goal is to ask (=discuss) philosophical questions, this site is not the best place to do so." seems somewhat undermined or at least effectively challenged by a very popular question on the forum this morning, entitled:

"Is it possible to scientifically determine good and evil?"; which had many thousands of interactions and therefore, one would assume, philosophical appeal.

Is there some nuance between healthy debate and discussion that I missing here? What about the risk of stifling debate if a user asks a distinctly pioneering, paradigm-shifting, innovative, question of profound implications. Yet, because it is ground-breaking, it is discriminated against by siloed thinking? How do we safeguard heretics who ask the questions that have not been asked before? One might say, pushing the boundaries of philosophical appreciation.

I would say, the heat of discussion - within respectful parameters - is how we arrive at the aggregation of empirical evidence in the formation of NEW ideas.

  • To parody a well-worn philosophical axiom, there is an important distinction between what users of a site like this ought to do and what it is that they are in fact doing. Oct 16 '21 at 18:13

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .