Renaming this forum: The Scientific Druid

[Explorer]

I want to suggest to rename this forum to : The Druid Scientist or The Scientific Druid. Or perhaps even "The Fferrylt".

Scientific inquiry is very much part of our quest for knowledge. In fact, in our time and age, it is the most fundamental and trustworthy method to discover factual knowledge about our world.

As druids we hope to reconcile that knowledge with the spiritual meaning that we experience through the world of nature. Together this can give us insights, wisdom, balance. This process of reconciliation is sometimes called alchemy, and in OBOD druidry we sometimes refer to druid alchemists as 'fferrylt'.

'Skeptical Druid' is a term that is too negative, and it draws 'bad vibes'.
It attracts people who focus on the perceived contradiction between science and spirituality, people who don't understand that it is the reconciliation of the two that holds the key to druidic wisdom. The key to meaningful truth, instead of meaningless facts or meaningful ignorance.

Most of this message board is already dedicated to spirituality, personal experience, and full of imaginative idea's. That is nice, but I firmly believe that we also need a corner that is dedicated to scientific inquiry, rational thinking, research, knowledge, education, truth.

To some of us this is a dedication, a calling, hard work, our jobs, and part of our quest for knowledge. We hold these qualities as sacred, for us druidry has no foundation without it. And some of us have been wondering how get a bit more awareness for that in our druid community. Perhaps renaming this forum is a first step.

[DJ Droood]

'Skeptical Druid' is a term that is too negative, and it draws 'bad vibes'.
It attracts people who focus on the perceived contradiction between science and spirituality, people who don't understand that it is the reconciliation of the two that holds the key to druidic wisdom. The key to meaningful truth, instead of meaningless facts or meaningful ignorance.

I disagree. Skepticism has a long tradition, and one that should not be abandoned because of perceived negativity and "bad vibes". And if it attracts people who don't have the same gnosis as you regarding science and spirituality, all the better! This is a discussion board, after all.

Also, there are many different kinds of skepticism besides scientific...there is religious skepticism, philosophical skepticism, perhaps even druidic skepticism

If you want to form a musty little club for the handful of trained scientists on the board, I support you fully. But keep your hands of "The Skeptical Druid".

[Huathe]

I am a " Scientific Druid " but my views have never fit in here. The " negativism " has always been strong here and I guess " Skeptical Druid " fits. Don't get me wrong, being skeptical can be a good thing but sometimes things get carried away here.

[Nicholaas]

I can sort of see where you're coming from, but I disagree on the need for a name change. As DJ already pointed out, the skeptical tradition has rich and extensive history, and expands to all areas of life, not just the scientific community. I think that broad, encompassing approach to the world is what this little corner of OBOD is about.

I also don't consider skepticism to be synonymous with negativism; that tends to be the position of one who's on the opposite end of said skepticism. A true understanding of skeptical thought understands it's one that, above all, values an open, honest, intellectual approach to life, and in doing so can call into question certain closely-held, emotionally-charged beliefs.

As for the Fferrylt title, I've never even seen that word until now, and I don't think it's too far fetched to suggest it may just further complicate an already (apparently) contentious issue of the "skeptical druid".

So no, I don't think it should change.

[Frog]

Interesting idea - but...

If we were to rename this, I wonder if the "challenging Druid" would be a better name. Whilst "Scientific Druid" does seem to have the elements that are often promoted, it also has the air of "stuffiness" and that any post would require an extensive appendix detailing source and reference. I do agree that the "Skeptical Druid" term implies that whatever is posted will be held for disagreement... requiring a very strong nerve to place anything here.

Forum (in my opinion) only exist if people post and comment - so although there is a "what's in a name" we need to be mindful that a name can deter people from contributing. And just reading what someone has posted isn't contributing.

Just my 2 euro....

[joey_bernard]

I also think the name should stay. I understand the desire to use "Scientific Druidry", but anyone trained in the sciences knows that skepticism is your primary, and most powerful, tool. You question everything you are told, and everything you think you know. The default position in science is "this is what I know, for now, based on the evidence". But this may change on finding better, or different, evidence. But in order for that new evidence to change your mind, it needs to survive your skepticism. Otherwise, you'll be changing your mind every five minutes.

My 2 cents...

[Bracken]

I'm agreeing with Explorer, because everybody else isn't. Oh, and because I do.

[Well, not the Fferrylt bit. They're mad spiritual.]

Aarrgghh! Edited for spelling.

[DJ Droood]

[Well, not the Fferrylt bit. They're mad spiritual.]

Giiuw, but I read somewhere that 'Fferrylt' is actually some sort of Middle-ages mangling of "Virgil", whose works used to be used as a divinitory device...you would pop open a copy of 'The Aeneid', say, and the first sentence you came across would be the answer to your question. Sounds like something Jean Markale would say. I am skeptical, but it would be cool if it were true.

[Al Hakim]

Why would you wish to rename the forum? "Skeptical" means for me to ask questions and to be allowed to have doubts. "Scientific" would mean to check every answer ten times whether it corresponds to scientific habits, quotations, wording and so forth. Why just creating another "scientific journal"? If I renamed the forum to "Pheryllt" it would sound nicer but would also be close to alchemy and leave plenty of room for superstition. But - as I understand it - druidry is often controversial, and - as we learnt from other fora - fringe science.

Al Hakim

[Explorer]

I'm agreeing with Explorer, because everybody else isn't. Oh, and because I do.

HAHAHA!! Thank you!
I missed you in Glastonbury!

[treegod]

"Skeptical" means for me to ask questions and to be allowed to have doubts.

Some time ago I did a poll to see what Christian saints people thought should be the "patron Saint/s of OBOD". St. Thomas the Doubter came out as one of the favourites from what I recall.

I have no problem with the word "skeptical", and I think that the Skeptical board has some of the most interesting discussions on this board! And it's not always "skeptical".

[DaRC]

Whilst I understand Nico's POV I think that the language determines it, as I'm always skeptical of experts...

skeptic –noun
1. a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual.
2. a person who maintains a doubting attitude, as toward values, plans, statements, or the character of others.
3. a person who doubts the truth of a religion, especially christianity, or of important elements of it.

skeptical –adjective
1. inclined to skepticism; having doubt: a skeptical young woman.
2. showing doubt: a skeptical smile.
3. denying or questioning the tenets of a religion: a skeptical approach to the nature of miracles.

science –noun
1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.
2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
3. any of the branches of natural or physical science.

scientific –adjective
1. of or pertaining to science or the sciences: scientific studies.
2. occupied or concerned with science: scientific experts.
3. regulated by or conforming to the principles of exact science: scientific procedures.

[treegod]

Looking at those skepticism covers wider territory than science. Skepticism implies general doubt and questioning, whereas science has a narrower focus of study. So, this subboard either is about our doubts and questions in general, or about any fact/theory/method concerning the scientific discipline.

Funnily this thread conforms more to the former than the latter, being skeptical (or doubting) about skepticism, lol You do that on purpose Nico

[Merlyn]

Scientific reason is not the be-all of proof in all things skeptical.

However...
I do fully support the need for scientific minds in druidry.
To this end is the need for environmental solutions to human problems, our earth and plenty more.

Not so sure I would re-name or re-direct this forum, as much as suggest creating a forum for science.

Merlyn /|\

[Huathe]

Merlyn,

Is there not a need because scientific minds are already a part of druidry?

Druids are learners and science has a place among us.

H.E.

[Merlyn]

Yes,

There is a need.
http://www.druidry.org/board/dhp/viewto ... 314&t=3847
Absolutely,
There is a need past even the most pressing issues. Druidry should include (be part of and encourage) the best scientific minds of today, and the insight science brings to druid lore.


In light,

[reilz81]

if it was called the scientific druid, i wouldn't even look in there, i have no scientific background, unless it was computer science done a bit of that, but i rarely come to the skeptical druid, because i find it hard to put across my opinion in the same manner that others with more scientific backgrounds do. So if there was a scientific druid, i wouldn't think my comments would be of any use.

[Heddwen]

I guess it would depend on the quality of the science. Often there are research articles here offered to support quotes which I think is a good thing. However, we know nothing about the reliability, bias, saliency etc of each piece. Basically you can obtain a piece of research to say anything....or is this the point of the scientific discussion?

If so, we could all be going around in circles until the cows come home.

I like the skeptical druid forum very much as it challenges the way that I think, which can only be a good thing. I see no reason to feel daunted by it as stepping out of our comfort zone occasionally can aid personal growth.

[Explorer]

I guess it would depend on the quality of the science. Often there are research articles here offered to support quotes which I think is a good thing. However, we know nothing about the reliability, bias, saliency etc of each piece. Basically you can obtain a piece of research to say anything....or is this the point of the scientific discussion?

Well, my point is 'quality'.
I would like to see discussions here get some more quality, where the underlying basis of scientific research, experiment and objective and verifyable claims are respected. And also honoured as a valid druidic way of investigating reality and truth. And that requires some evidence to claims. Not to be absolutly perfect in a scientific sense, but simply to encourage more common sense. And to divide fantasy from reality a bit more than what is common in other forums.

I'm not saying that this quality IS druidry, but without this important grounding quality, druidry would be a bit like a cartoon like karikature or wannabe druids, Asterix and Obelix material. For me at least. Lots of fun, lots of fantasy, but lightweight nonsense, lacking real meaning, because it would lack real grounding in nature. That sort of truth is important for me.

I'm not sure how to reach that quality. It may sound arrogant, but I guess I'm looking for a way to keep the insane people from ruining the more interesting threads. And the word 'science' may deter them a bit. But I've seen good arguments for keeping 'Skeptical' also.
So, I don't know if I agree with myself anymore either

[Merlyn]

I would like to see discussions here get some more quality, where the underlying basis of scientific research, experiment and objective and verifiable claims are respected.

A worthy cause Nico.

Good depth in discussion, researched, verified and well presented, is something I think many drui thirst for.
Such effort will often get side-lined, branched and even stonewalled on a message board.

Early on, this forum and a few others aspired to a constructive guideline to this end and with support to moderate and keep discussions on track.
As we all remember... it just didn't work. For the most part, it is a lot of work. Those investing time and effort often frustrated by the antagonizing and back talk.
Well intended moderators were often targets for all things, heaven forbid we have any "herding of cats"

Making a closed room where only the dedicated are allowed became a "secret society" of us & them problems. And the "secret" (as some called it) room was always frankly dead anyway.

All the history and cauldrons aside I would like to see something like what you inspire to here to actually work.
For me (the circle of the four dragons) and others, we found it can work if on a message board of its own. A place where the compromises needed here are not an issue.

Best I can say,