Why ask questions?

[Vinayaka]

I admit to being a bit annoyed at the nature of certain lines of questioning, especially in DIR sections. It appears to me that some people having ulterior motives ask questions for reasons that are nearing to just plain rude.

i have no problem with a legitimate curiousity seeker or scholar to ask a basic question of my or any other person's faith. (Then again, what's wikipedia or other resources for?)

But when the question is simply to irritate, or to start debate, or begin an argument, then I find it annoying. Its kind of like just going to the ________ section (any individual religion) and asking, "Why are _______ s so stupid?" It doesn't really serve any purpose, and its just silly. Maybe I wish the moderators would take a harder line? What do others think?

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Personally, I believe that a question should be asked for one of two reasons.
>>To obtain the answer
>>To search for an answer

The first is an attempt to obtain a single answer to their question that they can hold as an absolute truth, to minimise any uncertainty and to explain reality in a way that satisfies them. This approach can be used as an attempt to entrap someone by forcing them into a specific line of reasoning to arrive at their conclusions which may serve some purpose of the questioner. This approach, used to obtain 'the answer' is what most people use (imo), though for many metaphysical concepts (as opposed to questions of specifics such as history, clarification of a point of teaching etc) this approach is more problematic, because different people may arrive at different answers for the 'truth' they perceive, this means 'the answer' is ambiguous.

The second however is as much to promote discussion as to arrive at the answer itself, the focus here is not so much on 'the' answer as on the path towards some answer. This approach emphasises the reasoning involved rather than the conclusion reached and is particularly important when discussing metaphysical and/or general questions (as opposed to specific ones) as it provides a broader mechanism of communication by which to approach the concepts rather than getting stuck on the conclusions. This approach can be used to engage in a more meaningful dialogue, however by emphasising the path taken to reach conclusions it is more likely to identify (and lead to the critical or even cynical examination of) the reasoning used to arrive at the conclusions.

A question can be asked for many purposes, it is however, up to the individual who responds to choose how they wish to interpret it - the questioner on the other hand, must hope to receive what they desire, steering the question towards the information they seek. It is up to those who take part in the process to determine if that steering is guided towards the pursuit of knowledge or the pursuit of the humiliation of others. Personally I would choose to take part, up until I knew the purpose of the thread and if it were disingenuous (as opposed to openly being a critical examination for example) I would simply state my position ONCE more then leave, not replying any further. Should moderation be more involved? perhaps to move such threads from their current area towards a subboard that was designated to be more contentious in nature, other than that I feel that a liberal approach should be taken to such matters.

 

[nnmartin]

how about having one unmoderated section of the forum where you can say whatever you like to anyone? (a kind of forum dungeon)

any threads or posts deemed inappropriate can be shoveled down there.

I've been on a few forums with that set up - seemed to work ok.

 

[Renji]

From what I can see so far, there are some people asking questions with hidden motives in a DIR probably because they think they know about that particular religion too much. Some people don't really ask questions to seek an answer, but because they think that they know a lot about a particular topic already. There are also some who seem to start a debate in a DIR because they're not reading the forum rules. They don't know what DIR's are for.

 

[Renji]

how about having one unmoderated section of the forum where you can say whatever you like to anyone? (a kind of forum dungeon)

However, if that would be allowed, then it can be a "vehicle" for trolls and bullies to offend someone or a particular group. I think, it isn't nice and would go against the vision of RF.

 

[Vinayaka]

how about having one unmoderated section of the forum where you can say whatever you like to anyone? (a kind of forum dungeon)

any threads or posts deemed inappropriate can be shoveled down there.

I've been on a few forums with that set up - seemed to work ok.

Thanks for the reply, but I would disagree with this. I've seen the 'anything goes' types of forums. This one is really good compared to that, thanks to the moderators.

I basically wish I could mind read troll, or innocents, feeding the latter, and ignoring the former. It's tricky.

 

[Vinayaka]

Personally, I believe that a question should be asked for one of two reasons.
>>To obtain the answer
>>To search for an answer

I absolutely agree with this. unfortunately, its not always the case. I also don't mind the light questions from the humourists like Revoltingest. Keeps us all in a better perspective. Some days I forget. Too old.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Actually if you read the paragraphs below those two you will see how they can then be used for disingenuous purposes... its all about intent as you pointed out, but how will you choose to respond, I think how respondents reply says as much as the questioner's purpose.

 

[Vinayaka]

I did, I agree.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

*Blushes* uhhh I guess I should not post without having my coffee first x_x

*Runs away and hides*

 

[ChristineES]

I ask questions for various reasons:
1. To find out an answer or explanation
2. To hear other people's opinions on things
3. To learn things.
And of course asking questions always has ulterior motives- but that doesn't mean the question is malevolent.

Edit: When people ask rude questions, I tend to ignore them.

 

[DreadFish]

I like the idea of humoring the questioner as if they are asking a legitimate question. Doing so does not fuel any fires, because you just informatively answer a question, and can also be a bit of an insult on intelligence to the questioner

 

[Jainarayan]

I admit to being a bit annoyed at the nature of certain lines of questioning, especially in DIR sections. It appears to me that some people having ulterior motives ask questions for reasons that are nearing to just plain rude.

i have no problem with a legitimate curiousity seeker or scholar to ask a basic question of my or any other person's faith. (Then again, what's wikipedia or other resources for?)

But when the question is simply to irritate, or to start debate, or begin an argument, then I find it annoying. Its kind of like just going to the ________ section (any individual religion) and asking, "Why are _______ s so stupid?" It doesn't really serve any purpose, and its just silly. Maybe I wish the moderators would take a harder line? What do others think?

This had to be said. :yes:

It seems like some questions are intended to trip up the adherent to the faith being asked about. Most of us are not theologians or scholars, just believers. Maybe some of us have a little higher knowledge of the faith, but our beliefs are still our beliefs.

It's great to, as the rules say, ask respectful questions in a DIR for education, but it's not cool to ask questions like "If [your] God is so powerful can He make a rock so big He can't lift it?" (yes, stuck in the George Carlin 'Class Clown' days ).

 

[Huni999]

By definition, a person with faith should never question because with faith the answers never come.

Hebrews 11:1
1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

This means that with faith, there is no confirmation, no evidence, no proof, etc. So a person of faith should never seek an answer to a question because this in itself shows a lack of faith. If the answers are show to you, then it is confirmed. This doesn't fit the definition of faith.

This is why real religious people of faith can never be converted. They are not interested in proof, confirmation, evidence, etc. This is what causes people to strap bombs on their chest and blow up buses. Now to you, this may sound crazy but their faith says they will be rewarded for their acts. How can anyone who subscribes to faith say they are wrong? Wrong by what standard, proof, facts, common sense? That is not a prerequisite for faith.

All you have to do is believe. It doesn't matter what you believe in because your faith in that is gained by the fact that there is no evidence in your belief. So the world of faith will NEVER UNITE. To deal with facts or truth, you have to step outside of faith and look at what's confirmed and proven.

You can't convince a Christian that his religion is incorrect because that deals with proof. Faith is void of proof. Really people of faith shouldn't be on this site. Why are they here? For proof? For understanding? That not faith. Faith is to just believe. The evidence is not seen.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

I disagree, even a person of faith may seek clarification on some issue outside of their understanding - that does not diminish their faith or the relevance of their 'truth' it merely diminishes to an extent some small portion of that which they do not know. Faith does indeed usually revolve around Fideisim though and you are right, fidesim is extremely resilient against proof or evidence, or even rationality. That does not mean that fideism is inferior to rationality, merely different.

 

[Renji]

Really people of faith shouldn't be on this site.

So, does that mean that you aren't one of those "people of faith"?

Why are they here?

Why are you here too? If you can answer that, then perhaps you'll pretty much know the answer to that...

For proof?

Does having interest of something, such as a site like this mean that you are searching for a proof?

For understanding?

Would it be wrong if you want to understand matters, especially those that concern faith?

That not faith.
Faith is to just believe. The evidence is not seen.

So does that mean that it's wrong to ask questions about faith?

 

[cablescavenger]

I admit to being a bit annoyed at the nature of certain lines of questioning, especially in DIR sections. It appears to me that some people having ulterior motives ask questions for reasons that are nearing to just plain rude.

i have no problem with a legitimate curiousity seeker or scholar to ask a basic question of my or any other person's faith. (Then again, what's wikipedia or other resources for?)

But when the question is simply to irritate, or to start debate, or begin an argument, then I find it annoying. Its kind of like just going to the ________ section (any individual religion) and asking, "Why are _______ s so stupid?" It doesn't really serve any purpose, and its just silly. Maybe I wish the moderators would take a harder line? What do others think?

Some people like to question their own faith and challenge people, it may well be someone expressing their frustration and looking for answers or acknowledgment that others are frustrated too.

If it is a DIR, surely they are trashing their own religion?

 

[Vinayaka]

Some people like to question their own faith and challenge people, it may well be someone expressing their frustration and looking for answers or acknowledgment that others are frustrated too.

If it is a DIR, surely they are trashing their own religion?

No, its trolling plain and simple. I figured it out, and will be following other people's suggestions by not biting any more. Too bad this happens but it does.

Thanks everyone for the great responses, and suggestions.