Hm, the only populated non-administrative node I can find is about the nature of consciousness, and it has only to nodes, both of which seem quite broken to me. But I agree, this idea seems like a good one. In particular, it is a place where people like you and I might play, while wikipedia (for its own good reasons) excludes us with its policies of cited sources and no original work applied to the point of excluding new synthesis.
OTOH, when you look at the structured but unpopulated example of the 'god' entry, I'm still not sure what happens when you want to talk about, oh, I dunno, 'god is unique by construction, is theologically and psychologically relevant, exists in the sense of mathematics, and by definition does not exist in the sense of physics'.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-08-31 03:33 pm (UTC)OTOH, when you look at the structured but unpopulated example of the 'god' entry, I'm still not sure what happens when you want to talk about, oh, I dunno, 'god is unique by construction, is theologically and psychologically relevant, exists in the sense of mathematics, and by definition does not exist in the sense of physics'.