Locking the Theosophy Thread

[Avi]

Quote: Ben in Alternative Sub-forum

Thread closed. Please keep discussion civil and on topic in the future.

Ben Gruagach
moderator, Alternative section of interfaith.org

I am a little surprised that the Theosophy thread was locked down and more surprised by the reasons given.

First of all, I could understand locking all threads on Theosophy, because this is a religious philosophy based on racial superiority. But this was not the reason given for lock down.

As far as keeping the thread on topic, all of the discussion was about Theosophy. I am becoming more interested in learning about this subject and Nick likes to explain it.

In terms of keeping the discussion civil, there was no profanity used and just because the discussion becomes a bit heated, that does not mean it is not civil.

Is there a formal appeal process for a thread lockdown ?

[I, Brian]

Ben thought the thread was turning into a potential flame war, not least with the racial superiority comments.

However, have re-opened it to see where this goes - I have no idea whether there really is a racial superiority issue with Theosophy in the sense we understand, but I'd like to see how discussion proceeds without being seen to censor anything unnecessarily.

[Nick the Pilot]

If Avi keeps claiming that Theosophy is a religious philosophy based on racial superiority, he may very well be forced to reincarnate as a Theosophist next time and deal with the bad karma that he is creating. Poor Avi!

Hey Avi, I am going to give you a Theosophical name now, so you can used to thinking of yourself as a Theosophist in your next lifetime. How about us calling you Henry? Yeah, the name of one of the founders of Theosophy suits you nicely. I can't wait to see how you do as a non-cooperative Theosophist in your next life, being forced to defend yourself against your own claims of being a racist. This should be interesting....

Keep smiling, Henry!

[I, Brian]

Let's be clear, the thread is only open so long as both of you can try and act civilised - if it's only going to result in playground banter, I may as well close it and let you both find something more useful to focus your energies on.

Both of you - time to cut it out.

[Avi]

At least Nick did not give me the nickname of the darling of the Theosophical movement.................Adolf !!

Thread Locked

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Ben thought the thread was turning into a potential flame war, not least with the racial superiority comments.

Does this not suggest that any thread with a topic of (for example) Nazism would always be locked because it would neccessarily contain comments about racial superiority?

I too was surprised by the lock down, for the same reasons given by Avi.

s.

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Ben thought the thread was turning into a potential flame war, not least with the racial superiority comments.

However, have re-opened it to see where this goes - I have no idea whether there really is a racial superiority issue with Theosophy in the sense we understand, but I'd like to see how discussion proceeds without being seen to censor anything unnecessarily.

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Let's be clear, the thread is only open so long as both of you can try and act civilised - if it's only going to result in playground banter, I may as well close it and let you both find something more useful to focus your energies on.

Both of you - time to cut it out.

Damn....was just about to rep you then you have to go and dress up in your mummies pinny again!!

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Snoopy

Does this not suggest that any thread with a topic of (for example) Nazism would always be locked because it would neccessarily contain comments about racial superiority?

I too was surprised by the lock down, for the same reasons given by Avi.

s.

Godwin's Law

Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is a humorous observation coined by Mike Godwin in 1990, and which has become an Internet adage. It states: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1."[2][3]
Godwin's Law is often cited in online discussions as a deterrent against the use of arguments in the widespread reductio ad Hitlerum form. The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to Adolf Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that the likelihood of such a reference or comparison arising increases as the discussion progresses. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued,[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.
Although in one of its early forms Godwin's Law referred specifically to Usenet newsgroup discussions,[5] the law is now applied to any threaded online discussion: electronic mailing lists, message boards, chat rooms, and more recently blog comment threads and wiki talk pages.

There are many corollaries to Godwin's law, some considered more canonical (by being adopted by Godwin himself)[2] than others invented later.[1] For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that once such a comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically "lost" whatever debate was in progress. This principle itself is frequently referred to as Godwin's Law. It is considered poor form to raise such a comparison arbitrarily with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely recognized codicil that any such ulterior-motive invocation of Godwin's law will be unsuccessful (this is sometimes referred to as "Quirk's Exception").[6]
Godwin's Law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Hitler or Nazis or their actions. The corollaries of the law would presumably not apply to discussions covering genocide, propaganda, or other mainstays of the Nazi Germany, or – more debatably – to discussion of other totalitarian regimes. Whether it applies to humorous use or references to oneself is open to interpretation, because although mentioning and trivializing Nazism in an online discussion, this would not be a fallacious attack against a debate opponent.
However, Godwin's Law itself can be abused, as a distraction, diversion or even censorship, that fallaciously miscasts an opponent's argument as hyperbole, especially if the comparisons made by the argument are actually appropriate. A 2005 Reason magazine article argued that Godwin's Law is often misused to ridicule even valid comparisons.[7]

[seattlegal]

Let's push this line of reasoning into the area of the absurd to show where it leads: If you want to bring Hitler and speculate as to the source of his inspiration in his campaign to commit genocide against the Jews, one could equally ask what was the inspiration for the ancient Israelites to go on their genocidal rampages recounted in the Hebrew scriptures? Jeez.

[Avi]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Godwin's Law

Godwin's Law (also known as Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies)[1] is a humorous observation coined by Mike Godwin in 1990, and which has become an Internet adage......

.... A 2005 Reason magazine article argued that Godwin's Law is often misused to ridicule even valid comparisons.[7]

SG, your argument reminds of the "Soup Nazi" episode of Seinfeld:

The Soup Nazi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am in agreement that the terms "-Nazi" and "-Fascist" are overused. And when that happens it de-emphasizes the importance of how terrible this regime was. I am very familiar with this trend and make sure that I do not use these terms lightly.

And I have not done so in this case. Have you examined the case for why Adolf Hitler and the Nazi's choose Theosophy as their main religious philosophy ? Do you agree with Nick's hypothesis of the 60 ft. men which roamed the earth ? I have been reviewing the evidence that I can and I see a strong linkage with what is called "Ariosophy" an early precursor to Nazism. Godwin's rule does not apply to this issue !!

The tone of your post is in agreement with Nick's position, so I just want to understand yours.

[Avi]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Let's push this line of reasoning into the area of the absurd to show where it leads: If you want to bring Hitler and speculate as to the source of his inspiration in his campaign to commit genocide against the Jews, one could equally ask what was the inspiration for the ancient Israelites to go on their genocidal rampages recounted in the Hebrew scriptures? Jeez.

I knew it was a just a matter of time until someone drew this card in the arguement. It is another boogey-man argument. Even Nick did not try to pull that card.

Of course the Old Testament has a great deal of violence and fighting. It was written by a primative society over 2,500 years ago. Theosophy was written 100 years ago. You are comparing the two inappropriately.

In addition, you have seen enough of my posts to know that I am not a literal interpretor of the Bible. So it should not surprise you that I do not support or condone the examples of wonton violence in the Bible. I believe much of the Bible is metaphor and allegory.

Are you suggesting that non-literal interpretation of the "Secret Code" is the case for the racial theories of Theosophy ? That would be a new slant.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Avi

SG, your argument reminds of the "Soup Nazi" episode of Seinfeld:

The Soup Nazi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am in agreement that the terms "-Nazi" and "-Fascist" are overused. And when that happens it de-emphasizes the importance of how terrible this regime was. I am very familiar with this trend and make sure that I do not use these terms lightly.

And I have not done so in this case. Have you examined the case for why Adolf Hitler and the Nazi's choose Theosophy as their main religious philosophy ? Do you agree with Nick's hypothesis of the 60 ft. men which roamed the earth ? I have been reviewing the evidence that I can and I see a strong linkage with what is called "Ariosophy" an early precursor to Nazism. Godwin's rule does not apply to this issue !!

The tone of your post is in agreement with him, so I just want to understand your position.

I'm not into the kind of spiritual materialism connected to bloodlines and DNA, if that is what you mean, nor am I into Theosophy. However, if you do want to push the issue, please do tell me about the inspiration the ancients Israelites had for their genocidal rampages, and we can compare them to the Theosophists and Hitler. (I think both of them mention something about the giants or Nephilim.)

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Avi

I knew it was a just a matter of time until someone drew this card in the arguement. It is another boogey-man argument. Even Nick did not try to pull that card.

I told you it was absurd.

Of course the Old Testament has a great deal of violence and fighting. It was written by a primative society over 2,500 years ago. Theosophy was written 100 years ago. You are comparing the two inappropriately.

You are the one who pulled the genocide card first.

In addition, you have seen enough of my posts to know that I am not a literal interpretor of the Bible. So it should not surprise you that I do not support or condone the examples of wonton violence in the Bible. I believe much of the Bible is metaphor and allegory.

Perhaps this would be a place to begin a comparison of the ancient Israelites and Hitler, then?

Are you suggesting that non-literal interpretation of the "Secret Code" is the case for the racial theories of Theosophy ? That would be a new slant.

I'm not suggesting anything of the sort.

[Nick the Pilot]

"Theosophy was written 100 years ago."

--> The Theosophical literature which appeared 100 years ago is a re-release of the same information which has (according to Theosophy) been re-released many times over thousands of years. Theosophy's Stanzas of Dzyan is as old as the original copy of the pre-Jewish Torah, because they were originally the same book.

Seattlegal, you said,

"...please do tell me about the inspiration the ancients Israelites had for their genocidal rampages...."

"Perhaps this would be a place to begin a comparison of the ancient Israelites and Hitler, then?"

--> I do not know that matching Avi's negativity with more negativity is of much benefit. We can only hope that Avi will accept our offer to turn this around into a positive discussion.

"I think both of them mention something about the giants or Nephilim."

--> Does Jewish historical literature mention the giants? If it does, Avi's mocking of the giants-theory mocks Jewish historical literature. I would be very interested to hear what Jewish historical literature says about the giants, if anything.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

"Theosophy was written 100 years ago."

--> The Theosophical literature which appeared 100 years ago is a re-release of the same information which has (according to Theosophy) been re-released many times over thousands of years. Theosophy's Stanzas of Dzyan is as old as the orginal copy of the pre-Jewish Torah, because they were originally the same book.

What did Madame Blavatsky write about the beliefs of the ancient Israelites?

"...please do tell me about the inspiration the ancients Israelites had for their genocidal rampages...."

"Perhaps this would be a place to begin a comparison of the ancient Israelites and Hitler, then?"

--> I do not know that matching Avi's negativity with more negativity is of much benefit. We can only hope that Avi will accept our offer to turn this around into a positive discussion.

I'm not one to bandage an injury lightly, say shalom, and sweep it under the rug for it to fester.

"I think both of them mention something about the giants or Nephilim."

--> I believe the Torah mentions the giants. Avi's mocking of the giants theory mocks Jewish history.
-->

He says doesn't take it literally. How many levels of interpretation are there? I know there are several levels of interpretation in both the Hebrew and the Theosophical traditions, but I am not familiar with them. This is an area that I would be interested in exploring, and comparing the actions people have taken (good and evil) from different level interpretations. Perhaps this would be a good place to start a civilized discussion, and it might explain why Hitler went off on the Jews. (Making the same interpretive mistake?)