All content copyrighted.
The middle ground between logic and emotion is a particularly difficult one for me to spot.
This is what I wonder about.
You know, the way logic is espoused as supreme, is wonderful. Really. Particularly in a world that is so irrational. But I believe that living in that kind of world should give us an added look into how much emotion really rules us as humans. Particularly when we assume the logical conclusion shared by a whole bunch of people must be the same for everyone else.
How does one decide what is right or wrong, logically, without considering the fuel that keeps one alive. Computers are logical. Robots are logical. They are not social beings with fear of stigma, or creatures who feel pain and sorrow. The logic even, comes from a need to make a choice. One attempts to make a choice to engage balance, either in oneself or in relationships. The need for balance comes out of the need to feel a certain way. Would you be logical if it keeps you unhappy? Logical conclusions that do not give happiness are likely, not fully considered conclusions.
The question of how one deals with irrational beings arises. Most certainly, not by pushing logic into their faces. Or acting on ones own terms, seeing that as the most logical course of action. An irrational being has gone past reason. Any amount of logical consideration would be a waste. Lack of common ground I would think,would be a great reason to end certain interactions.
Logical answers do not seem the best ones always. Logical considerations given for emotional causes seem to cause the most disturbance.That one whole section of people can simply swat away the considerations of many others. "There's nothing wrong with all that" seems to do away with protest. Or, "It's not against the law" Or, "They have the right."
Yes, we all have rights. There are issues that are fundamental to human beings that cannot be given into emotional demands. There are human issues that transcend nationality, race and boundaries. One cannot approach them from a single angle. The sole angle of "rights" or "freedom" or "commerce". Especially when such values are not part of the belief system of others. They do not view these things as relevant. But believe they have the right to what they want. How does one's logical approach based on certain values help anyone here? But at the same time, the fact that there exists another thinking, feeling group of people who may have a different outlook cannot make the final answer absolutely right.
Hmm...tied myself up in knots there.
But it's exactly how I...well...feel.
You can tell me how you think/feel about it too~
The middle ground between logic and emotion is a particularly difficult one for me to spot.
This is what I wonder about.
You know, the way logic is espoused as supreme, is wonderful. Really. Particularly in a world that is so irrational. But I believe that living in that kind of world should give us an added look into how much emotion really rules us as humans. Particularly when we assume the logical conclusion shared by a whole bunch of people must be the same for everyone else.
How does one decide what is right or wrong, logically, without considering the fuel that keeps one alive. Computers are logical. Robots are logical. They are not social beings with fear of stigma, or creatures who feel pain and sorrow. The logic even, comes from a need to make a choice. One attempts to make a choice to engage balance, either in oneself or in relationships. The need for balance comes out of the need to feel a certain way. Would you be logical if it keeps you unhappy? Logical conclusions that do not give happiness are likely, not fully considered conclusions.
The question of how one deals with irrational beings arises. Most certainly, not by pushing logic into their faces. Or acting on ones own terms, seeing that as the most logical course of action. An irrational being has gone past reason. Any amount of logical consideration would be a waste. Lack of common ground I would think,would be a great reason to end certain interactions.
Logical answers do not seem the best ones always. Logical considerations given for emotional causes seem to cause the most disturbance.That one whole section of people can simply swat away the considerations of many others. "There's nothing wrong with all that" seems to do away with protest. Or, "It's not against the law" Or, "They have the right."
Yes, we all have rights. There are issues that are fundamental to human beings that cannot be given into emotional demands. There are human issues that transcend nationality, race and boundaries. One cannot approach them from a single angle. The sole angle of "rights" or "freedom" or "commerce". Especially when such values are not part of the belief system of others. They do not view these things as relevant. But believe they have the right to what they want. How does one's logical approach based on certain values help anyone here? But at the same time, the fact that there exists another thinking, feeling group of people who may have a different outlook cannot make the final answer absolutely right.
Hmm...tied myself up in knots there.
But it's exactly how I...well...feel.
You can tell me how you think/feel about it too~
Comments
Post a Comment