2) Interest in others' perspectives
3) Benefit of the doubt
Anybody is allowed in and given the benefit of the doubt, but this forum is strictly for reasoned, logical and interested debate. You can spam it up and scream insults all you want in TNYB (in fact, you're encouraged to let out your steam there), but when you enter The Real University it's down to business... and we're forming on the principle that we believe people are capable of doing that.
This is my motivation for founding this clan:
A lot of people really don't bother analyzing and assessing their own opinions; they just believe what they do and don't really bother thinking about the other side of it. I (in my own head) refer to these as "Default Believers." There are just as many DB's who are Democrats as there are who are Republican; or rather, it's pretty much proportional to whatever cross-section you might care to take. Then (to arbitrarily divide people up into 2 groups when it's really a gradient), there are Thinkers, by which I mean people who tend to put a lot more thought into issues, and even change their opinion after learning more.
Different thinkers, who really care and try to figure out what's true, consider carefully and reach opposing conclusions. Then, DB's follow both sets of thinkers without thinking at all. It's frustrating to me that we will often end up never knowing why the different thinkers, both groups intelligent and rational, didn't agree, and which, if either, was right.
With this in mind, why is arguing seen as a sign of hate? From me, arguing is only a sign of respect. It says, "I care what you think. I see you as one of the smart people, and want to rectify our difference in opinion. I want us both to find out which of us is right, or if we can't, at least gain some perspective on the issue."
If we only ever discuss things with people who happen to agree with us, then we don't really know anything. If we discuss (debate) things with a thinker who actually has some perspective on the ideas, then we gain that perspective whether or not anyone has changed their minds. I feel a conversation has been successful if I think something that I didn't before entering it.
If there's someone that you consider irrational, annoying, or mentally lazy, don't bother arguing with them. Just let them go on believing whatever they want. You're not going to convince them of anything, and more importantly you have nothing to learn from them.
I'm looking for some co-leaders for this clan, who have opinions and perspective different than my own. I'm atheistic, liberal-leaning, know the sciences more than the arts, and am from the US. Of course, we're looking for at least three leaders in total, so you don't have to oppose all of this. Most importantly, you should value rationality.
Bonus points for recognizing the reference in the clan name.
The only requirements are:
1) A real desire to discuss important and/or interesting issues.
2) A promise to remain civil and avoid insults and ad-hoc arguments at all times within the clan.