(untitled)

I honestly think it would make way more sense—and be much more practical—to just bundle Spirituality, Religion, and Alternative together, maybe even as their own dedicated subforum group.

Look, it’s all basically Spirituality, so why on earth are we splitting it up? For two of them, it’s a no-brainer, but then you have Alternative getting this weird special treatment when it functions exactly the same way. It’s got its own prophets, its own dogmas, and its own set of beliefs, constantly swinging between trashing Science = Ideology and suddenly clinging to it. Besides, any sociologist studying Religion isn't going to see much difference between believing in Yahweh and believing in aliens.

P. S. Hippo tried to pull some total silencing tactic over in that thread about fake cancer cures, moving the whole debate to a separate topic and threatening to kick out anyone who dared to mention those pseudo-crowds. Isn't that just another way of killing free speech?

I am in total agreement regarding Spirituality and Religion

steelsurfer42 said:I’ve been thinking—wouldn't it be more practical to just group Spirituality, Religion, and Alternative together? Perhaps even as their own dedicated subforum cluster—just to make sense of it all?

It’s all just Spirituality at the end of the day—so why bother with the shots?

I don't see why you're dragging Religion and Spirituality into your disagreements with the Alternative—they’re kept separate for a reason, and if you actually read the PDF descriptions, it's perfectly clear.

Spirituality and Religion definitely go hand in hand, and honestly, I wouldn't mind seeing an Alternative thrown into the mix too. Just my two cents!

I honestly don't quite grasp where this notion comes from—that Alternative is somehow being fused with Religion and Spirituality.🤷

If you ask me, there's a much clearer line to be drawn between Natural Science and that old PDF titled On the Edge of Science, which everyone knows today as Alternative.😁.

I already laid out my reasons, it’s not that hard to read. 😉

Look, when it comes to the edge of science, sure, it belongs in Natural Science. But let's be real—most of the topics sitting in there right now are pure Spirituality or just straight-up dogma. Trying to have a rational debate with believers in those kinds of ideas? It's a total non-starter. It’s just easier to toss the aliens, ghosts, and all those other entities into the pile with the gods and saints they’re clearly more connected to anyway.
The rest of the Alternative stuff mixed in with Natural Science doesn't even belong there, but it definitely has everything to do with Religion.

feralpilot0 said:I don't see why you're dragging Religion and Spirituality into your disagreement with the Alternative; they're kept separate for a reason, as it's clearly stated in the PDF descriptions.

I think you totally missed the point. The whole thing with the killers was just the spark—it's what forced me to actually start thinking about all of this. Besides, I checked this out a long time ago: pseudoscience is way closer to Spirituality than it is to actual science. I even started a thread about it once.
And as for the subforum description? I don't view it as some holy commandment or some divine decree from a higher power that I need to take overly seriously. :

silverpuma542 said:Spirituality and Religion definitely go hand in hand. I wouldn't mind seeing an Alternative connection too. Just my two cents.

Religion can certainly be spiritual. Believers within organized religions can express their spirituality right here in the Religion sub-forum.

Spirituality doesn't have to be religious. That is why we have the independent Spirituality sub-forum.

Furthermore, the description for the Spirituality sub-forum specifies it is for a Spirituality-free style of being. This refers to spirituality—most often personal—that doesn't stem from organized religion or even structured philosophy.

silverpuma542 said:Spirituality and Religion definitely go hand in hand. I wouldn't mind seeing an Alternative join the mix, either. Just my two cents.

Hey silverpuma542, that was a smart investment. For next to nothing, you scored yourself a voodoo doll for recreational poking. 😉 I placed it on the monitor. 🙂

steelsurfer42 said:I’m afraid you’ve completely misread the situation—really. All that obsession with killers? That was just the spark—the tiny little catalyst—that forced me to actually start questioning everything else.

Key Quote 😁

I've long since concluded that pseudoscience is far closer to Spirituality than it is to actual science—though I suppose I’ve already opened a thread on that particular rabbit hole, haven't I?
I don't exactly view this subforum as some holy scripture—nor am I acting as an emissary for some higher power—so there’s really no reason to treat it with such excessive gravity, is there?

Both the users and the architects take them seriously—because they felt that was the only way to make things work, and frankly, history has proven them right. boldsailor32 summed it up perfectly.

So, the only real issue here is those fringe elements over at Alternative—things that might (though I highly doubt it, since the Spirituality crowd is far too dim-witted for that level of paranoia) fall under the umbrella of Spirituality? And even then, it wouldn't have anything to do with Religion.
We could have just gone with an Alternative that actually follows its own rules—but of course, that keeps getting pushed aside, doesn't it? So we’re right back where we started.

My five bucks—is that really all it’s worth? 😎

On a side note—how we group these PDFs shouldn't be this much of a headache or a massive waste of anyone's time. steelsurfer42, if you were still a college student 🙂 😬

Sure, some topics overlap and others don't; things could arguably fit in multiple spots. But honestly, the current layout is just the result of users fighting for their own little corners of the site. It’s not random, and it hasn't always been this way. I suspect if we flipped the script, we'd just end up with a different crowd of unhappy people on the other side >>.

So, if the users on those boards aren't actually pushing for a reorganization themselves, then this whole thing feels like a calculated political move 😁

bluemason3 said:It's a minor detail—like deciding how to organize PDF files—and we shouldn't waste time debating it. Sal, you're acting like a college freshman here. 🙂 😬>

The truth is, some topics overlap while others don't. Placement can be subjective. However, the current layout is simply the result of users fighting for their own space. It isn't random, and it hasn't always been this way. I suspect if things were different, we'd have even more people complaining right now (totaling just 1 😁).

If the users on those specific boards aren't pushing for a reorganization, then this feels like a calculated political move. 😁

I think Ravana and Balkanian Pig would completely agree with you! 😁

boldsailor32 said:I think both Ravana and the Balkanian Pig would be right there with you! 😁

Of course they would. They were incredibly sharp, witty forum users, after all. ☕ 🙂

So don't go stirring the pot. 🙂 😁

feralpilot0 I can't even deal with this right now. Seriously? Is anyone actually listening to what's being said here? It's like we're all just shouting into a void!
Key Quote 😁

Wait, what? Are you serious right now? What am I even looking at?

People take them seriously—both the users and the ones who designed them that way in the first place. They felt like this was the only way to make things actually work, and honestly? Turns out they were right. boldsailor32 pretty much nailed it.

boldsailor32 didn't say a damn thing. Honestly, the Alternative just rounds out the whole spectrum perfectly. You’ve got everything from those completely baseless beliefs (Religion), to the stuff people actually question (Spirituality), all the way up to what's starting to emerge now (Alternative). It's a full circle, isn't it?

People will swallow pretty much anything you feed them, as long as you don't make them work too hard for it. Seriously. So, just because everyone’s nodding along doesn't mean they actually believe it—it just means they're lazy! You can't look at mass acceptance and conclude that something is actually right or good. I mean, come on! There was a time in this country when it was perfectly "acceptable" for a guy to beat his wife. Does that make it okay? Of course not! Just because it's common doesn't mean it isn't garbage.
Look, if the mainstream spiritual leaders actually sat down and engaged with the Alternative crowd, this whole debate would actually mean something. It might even get productive! If they did that, a huge chunk of the critics—who are basically just people rooted in Natural Science—would probably step up. Maybe then we wouldn't end up in this ridiculous loop where the forum moderators just kick out anyone who sticks to Natural Science? Is that too much to ask?

So, the only real issue here is those edge cases over at Alternative that might—though I seriously doubt it, since the Spirituality crowd is way too dim-witted for that level of paranoia—overlap with Spirituality. And even then, it’s got nothing to do with Religion.
We could have just gone with an Alternative that actually follows its own rules! But no, they just keep dragging their feet, stalling, and pushing everything back. So what happens? We end up right back where we started. Typical.

Look, you could basically split Alternative into two neat little piles—pure Spirituality on one side and pure Natural Science on the other. Simple, right? But let's be real: that’s never going to happen. Why? Because the "fringe" stuff has its own dedicated fan club that refuses to stay in a box. I’m not even asking for a total split here. I just want some actual, halfway decent classification! We need this so new members don't go charging blindly into the fray. They show up thinking they can debate the wild, boundary-pushing topics in the fringe section, only to get absolutely hammered by people with more rigid dogma than a medieval monk. It's a mess.

My five bucks? Seriously? 😎

Just like those damn Linden trees.

bluemason32 I can't even begin to deal with this. Seriously? Are we actually doing this now? What happened to common sense? It’s like everyone just decided to throw logic out the window at the exact same time! How much more of this nonsense are we supposed to sit here and swallow? It’s absolute madness!
This is totally secondary (how to group PDFs) and just a massive waste of time. 🙂 😬
Sal, you should probably still be in college

Ofkorzaj, honestly, once I actually get a job, I’m not going to spend my working hours obsessing over semantics like half the people here. 😛

Yeah, some things overlap, some don't, stuff could go either way, but this current layout is just the result of forum users fighting for their own little corner. It isn't random, and it wasn't always like this—I bet if things were flipped, there'd be even more unhappy people on the other side right now (total of 1 😁).

So, if the users themselves aren't pushing for a reorganization, then this whole thing feels like some kind of skeptical political move 😁

If you're happy about this (or maybe you're just being shallow), this move is basically like that recent vote of no confidence in the government. I'm not even looking for a win here; I'm just trying to force people—the ones actually capable of thinking, anyway—to realize what the so-called Alternative really is and what happens when it becomes official doctrine. We were damn close to seeing a mob lynch a few miners recently.

And yeah, that ban you slapped on me? Completely unjustified. It’s nothing but a tool to shut me up.
This whole thread is being handled poorly and clearly exists just to silence us. If they insist on forced conformity on the board we were kicked from, expect to be called out again. 😉

Alternative isn't part of the Natural Science PDF, so I don't really see the point of the first part of your comment.
No one is forcing you to stay or leave the PDF. There's just this constant effort from certain individuals within the Natural Science group to dominate the platform and drag their ideological battles into forum management. This specific thread is already becoming an issue because of that.
There’s no need to play the victim here. You aren't being treated any differently than anyone else acting the same way. Your specific viewpoint doesn't actually matter, but it's not your job to dictate how everyone else should moderate or manage things. That's just trolling, and trolling gets sanctioned. And yes, the goal is to quiet things down—not to silence skepticism, but to stop the trolling behavior.

Sure, you can call for order, but you can also face bias the moment those undesirable elements start drowning out constructive discourse or pushing a specific perspective. Personally, I think that perspective is good for the PDF and for anyone looking at various Alternatives to the status quo.

As far as closeness to Religion goes, the skeptics themselves display plenty of that mentality.😁

bluemason3 said:. It’s just a relentless effort by certain individuals on the Natural Science boards to steamroll over the PDF crowd and force their own agenda onto us

Science = Ideology 😕

Maybe I picked the wrong words. At the end of the day, even an evidence-based, exact approach can be viewed as its own kind of ideology—one complete with fanatics and religious psychology. People tend to identify so deeply with a group or an idea that they start "missionary work" to convert others. It’s a classic psychological consistency trap where publicly declaring your views just reinforces your own bias. It's basically just high-level brainwashing techniques used to cement a worldview. From there, you get subjective selection and all those other biases people love to accuse others of, while we all stubbornly pretend we're being objective. Any individual becomes an ideological fundamentalist once they decide their position is infallible and start trying to dominate everyone else's ideas—whether it's about Religion or just how to slice a carrot. There's a good anecdote about a famous American skeptic who once admitted at a meeting how awkward it felt because the crowd was starting to look like a cult gathering. You had elderly women with glowing faces standing up to "testify their enlightenment." 🤣
Everything needs balance, though it's probably unrealistic to expect that from a college student. That stage of life is practically defined by idealism. 😍

But that’s just pure exaggeration, which isn't what this forum is for. Besides, steelsurfer42 mentioned in his last post that he didn't actually think anything would change; he just wanted people to rethink the concept of Alternative. In other words, he's confirming that he's trying to turn his personal conflict with everything Alternative into a forum administration issue, essentially wasting the mods' and admins' time on his little power games. 😁

steelsurfer42 said:I think it would be logical and practical to group Spirituality, Religion, and Alternative together—maybe even as a single dedicated section of subforums.

The thing is, it’s all essentially spirituality, so I don't see why we need to split it up. For two of those, it’s obvious—but the Alternative category usually gets this special treatment, even though it functions exactly the same way. It has its own prophets, dogmas, and belief systems; it constantly oscillates between spitting on Science = Ideology and calling upon it. Besides, sociologists studying religion don't draw much more of a distinction between believing in Yahweh and believing in aliens.

P.S. S. Hippo made some attempt to silence people in the thread about quack cancer treatments by moving the debate to a separate topic and threatening to kick out anyone who dared mention anything pseudo-scientific. Isn't that just another way of stifling free speech?

Really, Sal, since this forum started, the trend has been breaking things down into smaller and smaller subforums, and now you want to merge them? 😁

And not even merging your stuff with someone else's, but rather "letting them unite"? 😁

By the way, yeah, I'm not a fan of the lack of free speech in the Alternative section either.
I think it would be much better if open discussion was actually allowed.

Where exactly is free speech being restricted? Is it because of actual opinions, or just the way people are talking (insults, trolling, spam)?
On this specific thread, the moderator clearly narrowed the scope to strictly focus on alternative medicine advice. They aren't allowing debates that they feel derail the topic, but that’s just how this specific thread is moderated—it doesn't apply to the whole site. We actually have similar threads where criticism and debate are encouraged. This isn't some weird precedent; the forum is full of them. Both the Alternative crowd and the skeptics who disagree with the restrictions are trying to elevate the conversation, which feels like a spiritual approach in itself. It's the idea that my identity is tied to the ideas I defend. So, if I get sanctioned, it feels like something greater than just me is being silenced. There’s no personal accountability there, just the usual victim mentality. 😁

But wait, did nobody else catch what steelsurfer42 was getting at? He actually laid out two distinct ideas here. They could either be merged together, or—and this is what I'm leaning towards—they could be split up into their own dedicated categories, much like how we already have separate sections for things like Sports or IT.

What’s the point? We already have a broad social group that covers all of this perfectly fine. Why wouldn't someone just argue for splitting off the natural science branches (physics, sociology, psychology...) instead? Honestly, that might actually be a more logical move 🙂