"Photographs, Ideas, and Meaning" (?)‏

Perfect.

A very thoughtful and useful post, Ernest − along with the best, and a pleasure to read.
I really don't know whether the change of name would satisfy the (excellent) aims you propose ... but it sounds more likely tan anything I can come up with myself.
In the same spirit of discussion as your own, I offer the following thoughts which occurred to me as I read your post. I'm not nailing any colours to the mast; just throwing them up as more friendly volleyballs :-)
1) If I had come into PN and seen "Photographs, ideas, and meaning", it would have attracted me into the forum for very different reasons from those which actually brought me into "Philosophy of photography". It would still have drawn me in, but by hooking into a different part of my mind. Would it, therefore, lose some who want something different from what the new title suggests? I'm not at all sure, more generally, that the new title subsumes all interpretations of the word philosophy. Perhaps what is needed is not a renamed forum but a split between forums which deal with different side os what this one now does? "Photographs, ideas, and meaning" and "Philosophy of photography" (or some new name emphasising a more formal approach)?
2) If I had come into PN and seen "Photographs, ideas, and meaning", it would (because of my own background and interests) have suggested to me semiotics and semiology ... so I would still have blundered in under a misapprehension. Perhaps no title, on its own, can properly define a forum's intent and purpose; perhaps a short (fifty words?) "prospectus" at the head of each would help? Or perhaps not.
3) Maybe we could adopt a habit of specifying the register we intend at the beginning of a new thread ("I am thinking in terms of philosophy as pursuit of wisdom here" or "My concern here is the personal outlook of the photographer")
To be honest, as I type each sentence and suggestion above I see that it wouldn't achieve anything ... either it would be often ignored or it would simply formalise the obvious. But, I'll leave them in place just in case they trigger more useful ideas and/or discussion by somebody else.

Perhaps what is needed is not a renamed forum but a split between forums which deal with different side os what this one now does?

I'm not trying to stamp out the discussion in this thread, but I should note that the probability of splitting this forum into two separate but closely-related forums is extremely close to zero. Splitting a forum is usually helpful only if there's a very clear divide between the new forums and there is enough traffic to support two forums (for example, there are separate Canon EOS and Canon FD forums). Dividing a relatively narrow forum with limited traffic into two separate forums generally results in two, almost-dead forums.

I'd agree with Mike that the split would be counterproductive, and unlikely. But I'd agree with Ernest that it's possible to make discussion about meaning, purpose, semantics, history, and all of the other entrees served up in this forum more approachable. That doesn't mean dumbing it down. Excellent proposal, Ernest. Well observed and thoughtfully conveyed.

This is, like most of my posts, an entirely personal view:

This Forum is famous for carelessly-unfocused writing that tries to pass for something deeper than it actually is.

Original Topics are often not even minimally thought-out in advance: lots of verbal backing-and-filling is done before the contributor figures out what he/she has in mind.

Rather than stating and expanding on central ideas, the writing is scattered and unfocused...a coherent question or Topic idea may or may not ever be expressed.

Some of us affect "stream-of-consciousness" writing style: the value of that kind of writing depends upon the writer's skill and the tolerance of readers.

On a good day of shooting photographs, I may come back with 200 shots on my CF card and 1 or 2 keepers. That's because I still experiment each time I go out. I take risks and chances.

I look at posts to this forum in a similar way. Some are grappling with tough questions to the point that they are, indeed, hard or nearly impossible to articulate clearly. The person who is willing to post a muddled, unsure, uncertain, even unclear OP earns my respect and attention. I enjoy participating in the working out of murky ideas. Sometimes, it's not pretty and that's a good thing.

In two welcome threads now, I hear complaints about the name of the forum, about regular participants of the forum, about esoteric references, and about uninteresting or too-obscure topics. All these complaints have merit.

I have this image of a dozen or more of you sitting back reading or skimming these threads making judgments and complaining to yourselves for months on end. Arthur has broken the ice with his very helpful thread and the floodgates have opened for more public, rather than private, complaining. A good thing . . . to an extent. I blame those who've been silently complaining as much as you blame me and the other regulars. Because you've sat back and done nothing about it. You haven't started less esoteric threads, you haven't asked questions about or googled references, and you haven't gotten into the spirit of murkiness to help those confused instead of just chastising them.

Many who are unhappy with the forum are looking to others or somewhere outside themselves for a change. Sartre* said, "Freedom is what you do with what's been done to you" and "Man is condemned to be free . . . is responsible for everything he does." Freedom is there, we can't escape it, but it's also not so easy. We look for ways out of exercising our freedom and acting with effectiveness. Exercising our freedom, for Sartre, makes us men . . . and women.

Most of the posts in these two forums have talked about what others are doing to get in our way. Name change is a focus. The name change is up to someone else, a site administrator. If only someone else would approve a new name, then I can participate or then others won't be so intimidated. Or other contributors are the problem. If only they would write differently or start more interesting and accessible threads. (Steve Gubin, thanks, you're the only person in the last week who started a thread.) If only they wouldn't make references I don't understand. All the freedom in the world I have to make this forum better by participating, by helping to move the discussions in a more meaningful direction, by taking a couple of minutes to ask questions or go to google when something's unclear, that's all too much bother. Freedom requires a little something of me, and I'd rather someone or something else change.

As I said in the other thread, I am who I am and I relish the fact that each one of you is in some ways different. I come to this site to express myself photographically in my own unique way and to view very different types of photographers' work. And I come to this forum expecting and hoping for the same. In my critiquing, I elicit what the photographer is after rather than substituting my own vision for hers. If I don't like a photo I try not to change it to be like one of mine but to help the photographer figure out if she can better achieve her vision. I'm not seeking to change much about this forum's title, structure, or the people who already participate. I'm seeking new, energetic, and challenging blood, people who will assert themselves, who will choose to act on the freedom this forum affords. It's the most loosely-moderated forum on PN, where tons of latitude is given for all approaches. Sartre would suggest that it's precisely that expectation of freedom and of each of us taking personal responsibility for what it can be that makes it so difficult.

_______________________
*20th-Century French philosopher who many consider the father of Existentialism, a branch of philosophy focusing on the freedom of the individual to make his own choices despite often being told he has none by political and religious institutions, and despite sometimes his own unwillingness, presumed incapacity, or laziness to act.

John Kelly,

Good writing takes many forms. This, for example:

Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Earnest B.,

Thank you for a thoughtful post. I can't come up with any good title suggestions (the best I can do is "Guiding Principles" which sounds like a soap opera). However, I will be interested to hear what others have to say. Perhaps an expanded "forum description" on the sidebar would help?

Ernest-

Your thoughtful proposal of a new title may well make access to the forum easier for some.

It may be helpful at this point to simply refer to a dictionary for a definition of what "philosophy" of photography might infer. The following definition is revelatory in some ways and does not strike me as being particularly academic, or even opaque:

(From the Oxford Concise Dictionary): "Philosophy: Love of wisdom or knowledge, especially that which deals with ultimate reality, or with the general causes and principles of things."

There are companion definitions of "natural philosophy" and "moral philosophy" in the OCD that are also interesting to read, but perhaps less relevant to photography as such. Perhaps the above definition of dealing with "ultimate reality and the general causes and principles of things" can be considered similar to your "ideas and meaning."

You suggest the word photographs and not photography. Photographs are products, whereas photography implies process. In the present PoP forum both are presently treated under the umbrella of philosophy, which I think is good. Philosophy is a rather broad focus and it is all too easy to discuss things outside of the limits of photography as such, but sometimes those discussions or analogies to photography or photographic process are useful.

"Ideas and meaning of photography", which I adapt from your idea, might be too restrictive. I don't know, it is only, as you aptly and wisely say, a volleyball return shot.

What you are suggesting as a title is interesting, but I think is also a clarification of a part, and only a part, of what the PoP forum is. To keep its broad sweep and yet to make it more "accessible" it woud be nice to have a synonym for the word philosophy. I checked my two (Roget and Mirriam-Webster pocket editions) and they do not help in that regard, so I guess we might continue with the term of Greek heritage.

There is another aspect to all of this. I have suggested a few times recently to maintain the PoP forum as such, but to provide a new companion forum that would address specifically those ideas, thoughts and actions that make up our photographic approach, maybe to fall under a title such as:

"Artistic approaches in photograhy" or "Approaches in art photography"

For those that might dislike the word artistic or art, I would simply counter-propose:

"Approaches in photography"

I avoid the term "Personal approaches..." as the hypothetical forum would consider those that are both personal and the approaches of other workers. The idea is not related to technical or equipment related approaches but to the ideas, thoughts and actions.

In sum, although your proposal aptly deals with a part of the subject (ideas and meanings, or photographs), I think I would prefer to stay with the PoP title of the forum, but would seriously propose adding to the PNet forums one which has not been previously highlighted, namely the "ideas, thoughts and actions that relate to personal photographic approaches." After all, we have two Canon forums.

This forum has become too damn self conscious with all these types of reflections on it. Self consciousness can be a real bitch, besides that I don't see what the "problem" is. The big difficulty here may be precisely that there isn't one.