Comments | wolfpeach: an irrational world, part 2

wolfpeach

an irrational world, part 2

Jul 23, 2007 19:47

"There is really no reason to suppose that animals have a clue about why they do what they instinctually do, and human beings are no exception; the deeper purposes of our "instincts" are seldom transparent to us. The difference between us and other species is that we are the only species that cares about this ignorance!"

"Breaking the spell, ( Read more... )

Comments 10

seinneann_ceoil July 23 2007, 19:15:22 UTC

I'm simultaneously fascinated and horrified by the irrationality of humankind. self included....

But that's what makes life and people so beautiful too!

As I was once reminded by this really cool guy: kisses are a far better fate than wisdom

wolfpeach July 23 2007, 19:43:47 UTC

No. I disagree. Stupidity can be cute (or naivety, perhaps, especially in small children), but thats not what makes life beautiful. Its what makes people sacrifice their lives for delusions, its what keeps people enslaved by notions that have no basis in reality, its what starts wars and justifies oppression. Life is beautiful because of its wonderful complexity and harmony and structure - not because people believe things that are palpably false.

tea_and_cuddles July 26 2007, 18:59:40 UTC

Man, that was nicely put.

seinneann_ceoil July 23 2007, 20:01:34 UTC

I think there's a difference between irrationality and stupidity. There are things in life that are not about being rational. The human need to assign consciousness to deeper meaning could be one of them. I wouldn't quite put that in the same category as believing something that is palpably false or something that is stupid ( ... )

irrationality & stupidity wolfpeach July 23 2007, 20:10:57 UTC

Yes, I agree that they are not the same thing. There's a difference. Perhaps we are talking about different things. And I would draw another distinction again between instinctual or intuitive "knowledge" (which might be right, might be wrong) and conscious understanding. I wasnt (necessarily) saying that religion is the root of all evil. Although it might be ;)

wolfpeach July 24 2007, 06:47:57 UTC

Even a philosopher who uses paradigms as a basis for theoretical reasoning is believing in something that is palpably false and impossible.

I'm intrigued as to what you mean by this... could you explain?

seinneann_ceoil July 24 2007, 08:46:30 UTC

Plato, for instance, used a concept that was later dubbed "Platonic form". For instance...if you were going to talk about a circle, Plato would say that we are invariably comparing that circle to our concept of what an absolutely perfect circle would be. Those imaginary perfect versions of things are the paradigms by which we operate. But a perfect circle doesn't exist in our and can't exist in our reality, only in our concept of it.

Thus do many ideas by which we form our relationship to reality with.

Thread 5

soquili_gitli July 23 2007, 22:02:50 UTC

Hmm, sounds like a fascinating read.

dennet el_bobulator August 4 2007, 09:52:17 UTC

I know what you mean about Dennet, I've still got your copy of Consciousness Explained unread on my bookshelf - every time I try, it takes about a page and a half before I go AAAAARRRRGGGGHHH at all the pointless fluff and padding and all the Completely Obvious Things presented in capitals as if they're a major revelation that the Dennet uber-mind has deigned to share with lesser mortals.

No input on the discussions about what it all means though, sorry m8