First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply Reason
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 4/21/16 , edited 4/21/16
I have some questions for you to consider and to contemplate.

Why is it that reason and logic has been attributed to being just a space void of empathy?

Why do people champion themselves as being arbiters of reason with justification that it is because they are insensitive to criticism?

Why is it that people assume what they are capable of or what they themselves are best at seamlessly translates to other people despite differing environmental and biological predisposition?

What is 'common sense' if you don't understand it--if you are unable to explain it?

What dangers are there of spaces ruled by its sworn loyalty to empathy? Now what about apathetic ones?

Why are people quick to label an idea created by 'other' and negate to address the idea itself? Are they content with bathing in the position they've already placed themselves in and so instead focus on nuances that fit within it?

Are people mindless to their emotionally driven 'war-like' dispositions?

Why do people waste time on those who did not reason themselves into their position and cannot be reasoned with? Does it fuel the ego to engage in fruitless situations?

What is the necessity of people to assassinate the character of their opponent instead of the ideas they are providing? Are their arguments unable to stand on their own?

Why are people quick to label themselves the more logical one, the more rational one, the superior intellectual if they are unable to demonstrate it without say-so?

Is it logical to ignore human nature rather than acknowledge it?

Ask yourselves these questions and then attempt to answer the following:

What do you think reason is? Do you think people have lost touch with it? Why?

Posted 4/21/16 , edited 4/21/16
Logic can be cold, machinelike, and completely devoid of emotion. Eg. My laptop
Emotion can be completely irrational and void of any logic.
Reason is being reasonable. Having just logic without emotion makes you no different from a thermostat. Having no logic makes you no different from a smelly dog.
Having both makes us better than animal and machine.

Its just the cool thing these days to be cold and logical and give no fucks. Plenty of mcs from fiction like that.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 4/21/16 , edited 4/21/16

Hail_King_Kakao wrote:

Logic can be cold, machinelike, and completely devoid of emotion. Eg. My laptop
Emotion can be completely irrational and void of any logic.
Reason is being reasonable. Having just logic without emotion makes you no different from a thermostat. Having no logic makes you no different from a smelly dog.
Having both makes us better than animal and machine.

Its just the cool thing these days to be cold and logical and give no fucks. Plenty of mcs from fiction like that.


Not bad. I have to agree the 'I don't care' attitude has long upheld by trends. Unfortunately logic does not have to be associated with apathetic behavior, although it often is. One can provide a better logical argument, despite emotional disposition. Similarly, one can provide an illogical argument regardless of being more emotionally hollow.

People have been misled to assume that the argument deprived of empathy and emotion is automatically the more logically sound.

14749 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/21/16 , edited 4/22/16

PrinceJudar wrote:

I have some questions for you to consider and to contemplate.

Why is it that reason and logic has been attributed to being just a space void of empathy?


Logic is little birds tweeting loudly in a meadow. Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers...that smell BAD.
4017 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Abyss
Offline
Posted 4/21/16

Why is it that reason and logic has been attributed to being just a space void of empathy?
I imagine because emotion and beliefs can heavily change what the truth is. Take the earth being 7000 years old. A robot would have no emotions, and would turn out a mathematical logic that results in an answer. Someone can believe that 1+1=3... but a robot without this belief will always turn out 1+1=2.

Why do people champion themselves as being arbiters of reason with justification that it is because they are insensitive to criticism?
Special snowflake syndrome.

Why is it that people assume what they are capable of or what they themselves are best at seamlessly translates to other people despite differing environmental and biological predisposition?
A lack of knowledge that all humans are not created equal. You will not always get your dreams, no matter how hard you try... and that goes for every person.

What is 'common sense' if you don't understand it--if you are unable to explain it?
Common sense is a moral proposal based on years of human change. It changes constantly and always will. 300 years ago, disease was spread through miasma... that was common sense. Now, most people (all I would hope), know there are virus and bacteria that cause it.

What dangers are there of spaces ruled by its sworn loyalty to empathy? Now what about apathetic ones?
A "utopia" will form. Lack of free thinking will occur. Only a single set of beliefs will prosper. Heretics will burn. This goes for both.

Why are people quick to label an idea created by 'other' and negate to address the idea itself? Are they content with bathing in the position they've already placed themselves in and so instead focus on nuances that fit within it?
I am not too sure what to say for this one. Have a hard time comprehending it.

Are people mindless to their emotionally driven 'war-like' dispositions?
People will always fight for what they believe in. It is human nature. We will never have perpetual world peace.

Why do people waste time on those who did not reason themselves into their position and cannot be reasoned with? Does it fuel the ego to engage in fruitless situations?
Some like to argue, some people don't like to give up. Some people want to dogmatize others. Many reasons can be given.

What is the necessity of people to assassinate the character of their opponent instead of the ideas they are providing? Are their arguments unable to stand on their own?
Personality assassination is much easier to do then research and back something up with logic and reason.

Why are people quick to label themselves the more logical one, the more rational one, the superior intellectual if they are unable to demonstrate it without say-so?
Emotion and beliefs.

Is it logical to ignore human nature rather than acknowledge it?
No.

Ask yourselves these questions and then attempt to answer the following:

What do you think reason is? Do you think people have lost touch with it? Why?
Why not? Humans will change, and change, and change... then die out. Nothing will change that. It is just how species work.
20759 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Online
Posted 4/21/16

Dark_Alma wrote:


Why is it that people assume what they are capable of or what they themselves are best at seamlessly translates to other people despite differing environmental and biological predisposition?
A lack of knowledge that all humans are not created equal. You will not always get your dreams, no matter how hard you try... and that goes for every person.



Knowing this is why i don't put effort into most things now-a-days now that i think about it
Banned
17503 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / B.C, Canada
Offline
Posted 4/21/16 , edited 4/21/16
Reason, Logic, and intellectual thinking are in my opinion all fine and dandy as vague constructs. But the reason I personally have lost touch with them is they are useless in the long run. You Ivory Tower idiots spend all day debating the whys, the pros, and cons of every single damn thing and never actually get anything done. Meanwhile all round you children starve, soldiers die, and the world economy is slowly but surely collapsing.

I can't personally support a construct like Reason when Reason seems to be justifying doing nothing. That wasn't how I was raised and it sure isn't how I plan on dying.
Posted 4/21/16
Reason to me would be admitting that we understand only so much and moving along with that with some tact while continuing questioning.

Yes, I would say that a pervading theme in our history is that we feel the need to fully understand and know things which is cool if we follow what I layed out above but at the same time some can't handle the unknown and just succumb to the way we want the world to be cause Its easier to stop questioning.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 4/21/16 , edited 4/21/16

Dark_Alma wrote:

Why do people champion themselves as being arbiters of reason with justification that it is because they are insensitive to criticism?
Special snowflake syndrome.


Keep in mind that those who react to 'special snowflakes' are your more likely type to champion it.


Ranwolf wrote:

Reason, Logic, and intellectual thinking are in my opinion all fine and dandy as vague constructs. But the reason I personally have lost touch with them is they are useless in the long run. You Ivory Tower idiots spend all day debating the whys, the pros, and cons of every single damn thing and never actually get anything done. Meanwhile all round you children starve, soldiers die, and the world economy is slowly but surely collapsing.

I can't personally support a construct like Reason when Reason seems to be justifying doing nothing. That wasn't how I was raised and it sure isn't how I plan on dying.


Getting something done is not equivalent to getting something good done. Millennials are more active than previous generations and yet here we are.

Blind action is just as helpful as intellectual circle jerking.
Intellectuals provide guidance by not just absorbing knowledge but by imparting it. They are taking action when they speak. Reason is supposed to help prevent other people from stepping onto mines and blowing themselves and others up in the process. Sharing ideas can be dangerous as well though--take Nazi Germany for example.

Banned
17503 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / B.C, Canada
Offline
Posted 4/21/16 , edited 4/21/16

PrinceJudar wrote:





Getting something done is not equivalent to getting something good done. Millennials are more active than previous generations and yet here we are.

Blind action is just as helpful as intellectual circle jerking.
Intellectuals provide guidance by not just absorbing knowledge but by imparting it. They are taking action when they speak. Reason is supposed to help prevent other people from stepping onto mines and blowing themselves and others up in the process. Sharing ideas can be dangerous as well though--take Nazi Germany for example.



And I say blind action is far better than getting nothing done. As my favorite American President Theodore Roosevelt put it there are three things you can do in any given situation. The best is doing the right thing, the second best things is doing the wrong thing, the worse is doing nothing at all.

Great things and shaping history isn't done by toying with the situation in silk gloves nor just talking about it. It is done by the soldier who charges the enemy, it is done by the blood, sweat, and tears of men like Martin Luther King Jr, Nelson Mandela, Mother Teresa, Mahatma Gandhi. Men and Women who didn't let Reason stop them from forever leaving the mark on the world and making it a better place .

Personally I would rather step on mine then live my entire life in fear knowing I did nothing because fear of what might happen kept me from doing anything.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 4/21/16 , edited 4/21/16

Ranwolf wrote:

And I say blind action is far better than getting nothing done. As my favorite American President Theodore Roosevelt put it there are three things you can do in any given situation. The best is doing the right thing, the second best things is doing the wrong thing, the worse is doing nothing at all.

Great things and shaping history isn't done by toying with the situation in silk gloves nor just talking about it. It is done by the soldier who charges the enemy, it is done by the blood, sweat, and tears of men like Martin Luther King Jr, Nelson Mandela, Mother Teresa, Mahatma Gandhi. Men and Women who didn't let Reason stop them from forever leaving the mark on the world and making it a better place .

Personally I would rather step on mine then live my entire life in fear knowing I did nothing because fear of what might happen kept me from doing anything.


Reason doesn't prevent one from taking action. It is not an either-or matter. Nor is action limited to political action. Not all good for humanity is done through politics. Also, those that you had mentioned did not 'overcome reason'--although one could perhaps say they overcame 'complacency' with the status quo.

I agree with making mistakes versus doing nothing. Our definition of 'doing nothing' seems to differ, however.



13131 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 4/21/16
It is human nature to believe in one's own correctness and righteousness. Even if you hold a deplorable standard, you will find that in the heart of your perspective on the matter, there is some righteousness present. Because of this, when others come along, challenging the ideas in which you govern your own behavior, it can be difficult to accept. Not only is it difficult to say "I am wrong" in the moment, but it is infinitely more difficult to say that your identity is not defined by the righteousness you came to see in yourself, and that you have become a being shrouded in faults.

Because of this, we build up ourselves. If we are empathetic, we decide their is an ultimate truth in feeling. If we are logical, we decide their there is an ultimate truth in thinking. If we are challenged, we decide their is an ultimate fault in the opposition's beliefs. We allow ourselves to become so wrapped up in our own perspective, that other perspectives become a danger to our identity, and the tighter we hold onto this identity, the more fragile it becomes, so we grasp onto it with even more fervor until it becomes our god. Our faith.

And how dare you try to murder my God.
22653 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 4/21/16 , edited 4/21/16

sundin13 wrote:

It is human nature to believe in one's own correctness and righteousness. Even if you hold a deplorable standard, you will find that in the heart of your perspective on the matter, there is some righteousness present. Because of this, when others come along, challenging the ideas in which you govern your own behavior, it can be difficult to accept. Not only is it difficult to say "I am wrong" in the moment, but it is infinitely more difficult to say that your identity is not defined by the righteousness you came to see in yourself, and that you have become a being shrouded in faults.

Because of this, we build up ourselves. If we are empathetic, we decide their is an ultimate truth in feeling. If we are logical, we decide their there is an ultimate truth in thinking. If we are challenged, we decide their is an ultimate fault in the opposition's beliefs. We allow ourselves to become so wrapped up in our own perspective, that other perspectives become a danger to our identity, and the tighter we hold onto this identity, the more fragile it becomes, so we grasp onto it with even more fervor until it becomes our god. Our faith.

And how dare you try to murder my God.


Hah! You don't disappoint, mate.



Then there are your theoretical scientists and philosophers who understand absolute or ultimate truth to be unknowable. What is verifiable is limited to probable certainty.

The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing. - Socrates
7413 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
48 / M / New England, USA
Offline
Posted 4/21/16

PrinceJudar wrote:

I have some questions for you to consider and to contemplate.

1. Why is it that reason and logic has been attributed to being just a space void of empathy?

2. Why do people champion themselves as being arbiters of reason with justification that it is because they are insensitive to criticism?

3. Why is it that people assume what they are capable of or what they themselves are best at seamlessly translates to other people despite differing environmental and biological predisposition?

4. What is 'common sense' if you don't understand it--if you are unable to explain it?

5. What dangers are there of spaces ruled by its sworn loyalty to empathy? Now what about apathetic ones?

6. Why are people quick to label an idea created by 'other' and negate to address the idea itself? Are they content with bathing in the position they've already placed themselves in and so instead focus on nuances that fit within it?

7. Are people mindless to their emotionally driven 'war-like' dispositions?

8. Why do people waste time on those who did not reason themselves into their position and cannot be reasoned with? Does it fuel the ego to engage in fruitless situations?

9. What is the necessity of people to assassinate the character of their opponent instead of the ideas they are providing? Are their arguments unable to stand on their own?

10. Why are people quick to label themselves the more logical one, the more rational one, the superior intellectual if they are unable to demonstrate it without say-so?

11. Is it logical to ignore human nature rather than acknowledge it?

12. Ask yourselves these questions and then attempt to answer the following:

What do you think reason is? Do you think people have lost touch with it? Why?



To answer your questions as I see them (only my opinion):

13577 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / Australia
Offline
Posted 4/21/16 , edited 4/21/16
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.