Hi again, Hypatia,
You say that today, but I wonder if you would have said that in 1935 or 1615 before Campbell or Galikeo became famous.
Why not? Expert doesn't have to mean:
showing a consciousness or feeling of being better than or above others
...which is the definition of 'superior' under consideration here.
But then I still have a question: WHY should it matter to ANYone, that a so-called "inferior" might be "less likely to take the 'superior' seriously' ?
If someone takes someone else's ideas "not seriously", then what harm does it do, as long as no force is involved? And if someone "assumes a position of authority" WITHOUT ANY ABILITY TO FORCE IT, then what harm can that do to anyone with a mind of her own?
Are you trying to "protect" forum members from subjectively feeling pressured by strong words? If so, then it would seem to be a very weak forum.
It shouldn't matter either way. But it does, nonetheless. We aren't trying to protect anyone, per se. What we are trying to do is nurture an atmosphere. Again, those who assume a superior status invariably become insulting and firefights are the result. Way, way back I was involved in one of the first Internet forums. It didn't last because certain dominant personalities would not allow civil discourse. There was also a Jung forum sometime back, and Cindy can tell you more about it, that was very poorly moderated and dominated by a few heavy handed personalities... two of whom participated here, one was banned and the other would have been if he hadn't left on his own.
These personalities, and make no mistake, they are trolls, destroy forums
. That Jung forum became so cantankerous it was shut down.
The pattern is always the same. What starts as an exchange of ideas turns into personal comments and insults that derail the conversation. Subsequently, forum participation drops off.
As I said earlier in this thread, everyone who has earned a ban from this site considered themselves superior, made sure everyone knew they thought so through personal comments, derailed conversations and considered themselves immune to the Guidelines written up for this site by the managing editor of the Joseph Campbell Foundation.
We aren't protecting associates from each other. We're protecting this forum. This is why the Guidelines are written as they are:
1. Respect others: Should the opinion of another associate spark your anger or scorn, rather than your spirit or mind, please take a deep breath and consider before posting an ungenerous response. Flaming, the online equivalent of ranting, can seem terribly gratifying in the short term, but it is a very ineffective form of communication.
The same can be said of ad hominem attacks, wherein an associate who is unhappy with a fellow associate's post attacks the colleague him- or herself, rather than discussing the ideas in the post that caused distress. If something an associate says makes you feel like you want to howl, please do it in the privacy of your own home.
2. Respect others' opinions: These are Conversations, not Conversions. 'Conversation' comes from the Latin words con ('with') and verso ('opposite'). We expect diverse opinions to be expressed in these forums, and welcome them. Remember, just because you disagree with what someone has to say doesn't mean they don't get to say it. Of course, it also doesn't mean you have to agree; if you chose to express your disagreement, do refer to guideline #1, however.
Those are the ones that matter in this context. The bottom line is, address the ideas in the post. Respect that those ideas are of value to the person who wrote them.
Civility is expected, no? But that doesn't necessarily mean 'nice.'
Personalities won't be allowed to dominate this site with dogmatic and personally insulting rhetoric. As such, those who frequent this Forum generally appreciate the environment the Foundation is trying to nurture.
And we are tolerant to a fault sometimes. Since 2003, thereabouts, only four people have earned permanent bans.
They all followed the same pattern. The vast majority of forum associates
follow a learning curve and do just fine.
Note the word the Foundation uses for those who create a profile: associate
. Comrade, ally, colleague. Self-styled Bosses, Generals and Messiahs need not apply.
....You posted while I was composing, Nandu!