Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6716|67.222.138.85
The basic thought that guides the Western world has changed very little since the Renaissance. Reason, logic, and scientific precision are the staples of the everyday. Even when talking about religion reason is demanded from both sides, both from the people attacking the orange as if it was an apple and the people attempting to defend abstract concepts with concrete examples. Reason is supposed to be the defining force behind every motive, and anything else is madness.

I find it very difficult to wrap my mind around this idea, which to me seems irrefutable, when humans are such irrational beings. Humans consider themselves more advanced than all other animals on based on our rationality and intellect yes, and there must be something to that considering our otherwise lack of physical prowess. Yet at the same time the very things we find to be the most “human” are those without any semblance of reason. Emotion, the fine arts, love, all things that are generally considered the cruxes of our humanity. Now the idea of our humanity and reason sitting side by side may not be impossible, but humanity juxtaposed with rationality degrades the value of the reason to the point that it is invalid.

I believe that because any blemish in reason when multiplied across the millions of people working together in a society becomes serious dissonance. As there can only be one right answer* the very fact that there are multiple points of view proves that our “humanity” is influencing our reason. Not only that but we consider the ideal system to be one where multiple views are not only heard but are encouraged, seemingly in direct opposition to pure reason.

Our worship of reason is a phase we will go through as we have gone through phases of worshiping God(s), phases of worshiping the Church, phases of worshiping ourselves, phases of worshiping nature, and because it is merely a phase I am grateful. I am grateful because true reason is something that cannot be attained by irrational humans, and in trying to be something we aren’t we make things worse than they have to be. It is ridiculous to believe that through reason we can explain things like what the perfect government is, what level of socialism is acceptable, or how war should be justified. I can’t imagine a world where we try to answer those questions with anything but reason because this is the time I have been born into, just as a peasant born in the medieval period could not possibly comprehend the philosophical norms of today. However, I must and do believe that reason is not the answer, and that be it in 100 years or 1,000 years there will be a society that recognizes that.

*Logic can only lead to the correct answer. We don’t know what the correct answer is, we don’t even know what the right question is, but there is a correct solution to all of our problems. Opposed views cannot both be correct and both use reason as their proof.

Spoiler (highlight to read):
yes I realize the irony
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6684|Canberra, AUS
That's an interesting proposition. Will have to mull this one over.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|6724|US

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

As there can only be one right answer* the very fact that there are multiple points of view proves that our “humanity” is influencing our reason.
Are you sure there is only one correct answer?  Each person has their own interest in problems and solutions.  For example, government-healthcare may be good for the single mother of three, but bad for the owner of a business that pays taxes to support it.  Banning guns may be good for the family which would have lost a child to carelessness, but equally bad for the old lady murdered by a younger, stronger robber.  See where I am going here?
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6775|Cambridge (UK)
What u been smoking?

And can I have some?

Like Spark said, interesting proposition, requires mullage...
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6162|what

Flaming Maniac wrote:

Opposed views cannot both be correct and both use reason as their proof.
Yes they can, when it comes to quantum mechanics.

But in a purely scientific and testable medium, opposed views are hypothesis and they don't use reason as their proof, they use reason to disprove the hypothesis. That's the beauty of science.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6333|New Haven, CT
Let's see if I summarized this correctly:

Humans claim or believe to do everything with reason, even though their natural irrationality precludes this from being true (and as practice demonstrates). You believe that it is an infatuation of humanity, which which eventually, and fortunately, be eschewed in favor of a more accurate mentality, whatever it is.

Right?
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6538|Global Command
Reason and logic are still trumped by emotion, unless you are a Vulcan.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6716|67.222.138.85

RAIMIUS wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

As there can only be one right answer* the very fact that there are multiple points of view proves that our “humanity” is influencing our reason.
Are you sure there is only one correct answer?  Each person has their own interest in problems and solutions.  For example, government-healthcare may be good for the single mother of three, but bad for the owner of a business that pays taxes to support it.  Banning guns may be good for the family which would have lost a child to carelessness, but equally bad for the old lady murdered by a younger, stronger robber.  See where I am going here?

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

*Logic can only lead to the correct answer. We don’t know what the correct answer is, we don’t even know what the right question is, but there is a correct solution to all of our problems. Opposed views cannot both be correct and both use reason as their proof.
unless I don't understand what you're saying...

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

What u been smoking?
My mindscape, my anti-drug.

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Flaming Maniac wrote:

Opposed views cannot both be correct and both use reason as their proof.
Yes they can, when it comes to quantum mechanics.

But in a purely scientific and testable medium, opposed views are hypothesis and they don't use reason as their proof, they use reason to disprove the hypothesis. That's the beauty of science.
Well this is philosophy, not quantum mechanics.

The mentality leads to the nature of the scientific method. You can't use the results to prove the theory, it's as useless as getting the right answer for the wrong reasons. You're arguing on a different level if you will.

nukchebi0 wrote:

Let's see if I summarized this correctly:

Humans claim or believe to do everything with reason, even though their natural irrationality precludes this from being true (and as practice demonstrates). You believe that it is an infatuation of humanity, which which eventually, and fortunately, be eschewed in favor of a more accurate mentality, whatever it is.

Right?
Generally right. The mentality that replaces it will not necessarily be "more accurate", it will just be more helpful to advancing society.

ATG wrote:

Reason and logic are still trumped by emotion, unless you are a Vulcan.
So let's stop kidding ourselves and embrace it.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6684|Canberra, AUS
The problem is that someone could easily claim emotional superiority and you have nothing that you could say to debunk it. So basically someone can easily dictate the terms of THE game.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6538|Global Command
aH HA.

yOUR POINT IS THAT WE MUST EMBRACE EMOTION AS A RULING FORCE IN OUR SOCIETY IN ORDER TO EVOLVE.





sOMEDAY i WILL EVOLVE TO THE POINT THAT i LOOK AT THE SCREEN AS i TYPE SO i NOTICE MY CAPS LOCK IS ON.
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6162|what

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You're arguing on a different level if you will.
I do that sometimes, sorry.

Looks like ATG is as well.

https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6716|67.222.138.85

Spark wrote:

The problem is that someone could easily claim emotional superiority and you have nothing that you could say to debunk it. So basically someone can easily dictate the terms of THE game.
Your post demonstrates the exact attitude I'm talking about. Even when the topic has nothing to do with logic (as per someone someone based their point of view on emotion) that you are still trying to force reason into the situation. Just as bringing in pagan gods as a justification is silly today, tomorrow bringing reason as justification will be equally ridiculous.

and either I just got the equivalent of an e-heckling from ATG or he's going to have lots of fun in the morning.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6538|Global Command
I wasn't heckling you.

I observed that you stated that there are few greater forces in human nature than emotion.

I think you are heckling those who are trying to counter your thesis with logic.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6716|67.222.138.85

ATG wrote:

I wasn't heckling you.

I observed that you stated that there are few greater forces in human nature than emotion.

I think you are heckling those who are trying to counter your thesis with logic.
The caps lock thing suggested PUI.

I am not heckling anyone, it's just that the whole point of this is it is not a typical DAST thread, you can't resort to what you normally would to "challenge" the OP. If the theory is that reason itself is flawed, how can you argue against the theory using reason? If the theory is true then the counterpoint is invalid, if the theory is false then why are you trying to disprove it?

The interesting part is that it works both ways. If you have any reason other than logic to disagree then I have no recourse to logic for a rebuttal.
GorillaTicTacs
Member
+231|6383|Kyiv, Ukraine
This is pretty old-school political theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pournelle_chart

Conservatives get pretty emotional when they're referred to as "irrational" though, even though it is accurate in a clinical sense.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6115|eXtreme to the maX
Logic and reason can work well for some things, science, engineering etc.
Others, religion, love, etc they don't and there's no point trying to make them.

A big problem is often poor reasoning.
'I followed a logical process, therefore I have the right answer' or 'I have experience, therefore I have the right answer'.

I find my best decisons have been those where I've followed my heart or my gut.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6115|eXtreme to the maX

Spark wrote:

The problem is that someone could easily claim emotional superiority and you have nothing that you could say to debunk it. So basically someone can easily dictate the terms of THE game.
We have it all the time, its the 'I have experience - you're wrong' argument.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6684|Canberra, AUS
That's still logic.

What FM is talking about is 'No, you're wrong because I say so.'

Or:

'No, you're wrong because I feel you're wrong.'
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6115|eXtreme to the maX
That's still logic.
Not particularly, having 'experience' doesn't make people right about any subject they care to pick.
How about 'You're wrong because my IQ is higher than yours'.
Would seem to follow reason, but wouldn't be right either.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2008-10-26 02:12:00)

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6684|Canberra, AUS
That's not the point...
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|6775|Cambridge (UK)

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

ATG wrote:

I wasn't heckling you.

I observed that you stated that there are few greater forces in human nature than emotion.

I think you are heckling those who are trying to counter your thesis with logic.
The caps lock thing suggested PUI.

I am not heckling anyone, it's just that the whole point of this is it is not a typical DAST thread, you can't resort to what you normally would to "challenge" the OP. If the theory is that reason itself is flawed, how can you argue against the theory using reason? If the theory is true then the counterpoint is invalid, if the theory is false then why are you trying to disprove it?

The interesting part is that it works both ways. If you have any reason other than logic to disagree then I have no recourse to logic for a rebuttal.
It doesn't feel right to me.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6538|Global Command
PUI on a Saturday is pretty well a given with me.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6716|67.222.138.85

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

This is pretty old-school political theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pournelle_chart

Conservatives get pretty emotional when they're referred to as "irrational" though, even though it is accurate in a clinical sense.
I don't quite see how this pertains? Faulty reason pervades every aspect of our society, not just our governmental ideals, and some day reason will no longer reign supreme. That's the point.
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|6724|US

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

RAIMIUS wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

As there can only be one right answer* the very fact that there are multiple points of view proves that our “humanity” is influencing our reason.
Are you sure there is only one correct answer?  Each person has their own interest in problems and solutions.  For example, government-healthcare may be good for the single mother of three, but bad for the owner of a business that pays taxes to support it.  Banning guns may be good for the family which would have lost a child to carelessness, but equally bad for the old lady murdered by a younger, stronger robber.  See where I am going here?

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

*Logic can only lead to the correct answer. We don’t know what the correct answer is, we don’t even know what the right question is, but there is a correct solution to all of our problems. Opposed views cannot both be correct and both use reason as their proof.
unless I don't understand what you're saying...
I am saying your premise may not be correct.  There may not be only ONE correct answer for all situations, as each side has an  answer which would be most benefitial to them.  In that case, "correctness" depends on point of view...unless you are saying there is some question out there which leads to one correct answer, but humans cannnot find it...in which case I would dismiss the value of the entire argument because it becomes worthless in a practical sense.
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6716|67.222.138.85

RAIMIUS wrote:

I am saying your premise may not be correct.  There may not be only ONE correct answer for all situations, as each side has an  answer which would be most benefitial to them.  In that case, "correctness" depends on point of view...unless you are saying there is some question out there which leads to one correct answer, but humans cannnot find it...in which case I would dismiss the value of the entire argument because it becomes worthless in a practical sense.
Opposed views cannot both be correct and both use reason as their proof.

Reason can only lead to one solution, but there are other means of coming to conclusions that could lead to different solutions.

For example, the classic having to choose between the death of a loved one and the death of a thousand strangers. Assuming the question is how to minimize human loss of life and suffering the reasonable decision is clear, but obviously there is more to the question than that.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard