⚠️ On note to the current chaos, The Subreddit's Position on Epistemic Standards [Must Read]
Welcome to r/Philosophy_India.
This post is regarding the clarification of the community's epistemic standards and as to what constitutes a worthy post for the subreddit. The community's epistemic standards, the community's recognition for philosophical systems and traditions, notes on miscellaneous topics.
Since the last couple of days, we've seen an unusual amount of rules-violating contents that went unremoved and are diminishing the quality of the community. The mass amount of such posts was simply beyond our usual capacity to moderate. But now we've decided to be stricter with our community's rules and guidelines. Philosophical Criteria
Minimum Epistemic Standards
Basic Discussion Criteria:
- The Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR):
- No philosophical claim (especially metaphysical ones) can be accepted as a starting point unless it is preceded by a logical derivation. The post must provide the reasoning that leads to X, independent of the person saying it.
- (¹) For every fact X, there must be provided a sufficient reason why X is the case.
> ^(This criterion might lead to (or can be argued to be a victim of Münchhausen Trilemma/Agrippa’s Trilemma, but as a space for discussions, the sub will restrain from picking a position. For every substantial claim the post is expected to beforehand clarify their position. It is important to note that, the post ought not to justify the prior epistemological justification, for every post P with content C, you ought only to prove why C is the case and not necessarily, C is the case because D reasoning and D reasoning grounds in E.... unless the post is specifically about epistemological inquiry and justifications there's no need to drift into infinite regress.)
In practice, this means: > Make a clear claim > Provide a reason > Clarify key terms > Avoid naked assertions.
- Only Substantive Contributions are Allowed:
- A substantive contribution is an intellectually honest engagement that identifies a specific philosophical problem, provides a reasoned derivation (grounded in the PSR), and accurately represents the established definitions of the school being discussed before (or if) critiquing it. We are here for Vada (truth-seeking dialogue). If your post is Vitanda (merely attacking others without a counter-position) or Jalpa (shouting for your guru to win), it will be removed.
On note to Indian Philosophy: It's often a task to ground every ancient eastern and Indian philosophy to epistemic criteria that of western logic. We will not be enforcing that, instead, every post and comment that defends/attacks ancient traditions must be grounded in their classical philosophy textually/conceptually, meaning you ought to support your assertions and questions with established meaning of the scriptures and schools of thoughts. This does not necessarily grant poster to engage with fallacious reasoning.
On note to Continental Philosophy: Continental frameworks (phenomenology, deconstruction, hermeneutics) are completely welcome. However, stylistic obscurity is not a substitute for argument. Where a term resists easy definition as is legitimate in some traditions, posters are expected to acknowledge this explicitly and engage with why the ambiguity is philosophically productive rather than using it to avoid scrutiny.
^(continental philosophers, Heidegger especially use terms that are deliberately resistant to precise definition. Some philosophical terms resist strict definition, but they are still constrained by how they are used, described, and interpreted.)
Note on Bhakti/Anubhava: The community is aware that Anubhava is a legitimate pramāṇa in many Indian schools. However, posts grounding experiential claims in a textual or conceptual tradition are welcome and posts that merely share personal experience without philosophical engagement will be removed under the PSR standard. Meaning, it is allowed to talk about classical concepts of anubhava/bhakti and other ancient phenomenological topics only as classically established and talked about, not as a substantive claim of reality, unless, otherwise defended through rigor.
Note on Politics: Political parties, current political situation, protests, elections are all strictly forbidden. The discussion should, rather, be on the meta-level of politics, established political philosophy, theories of justice, legitimacy, sovereignty, the state, rights, and related foundational questions.
Note on Philosophical Memes: Memes are permitted only if they directly reference a specific, known philosophical concept, argument, or text in a way that is recognizable and accurate. Memes that merely use philosophical aesthetics or vaguely gesture at philosophical themes or will be removed.
Note on AI generated contents: All contents, with an exemption of images but, including comments must not originate from AI, it is highly discouraged to use artificial intelligence for debating and making your point. You're free to use it for understanding but AI copy-paste is strictly forbidden.
posts under the moderators' discretion.
