User Tag List

Results 1 to 7 of 7

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    336

    Default Can reason be humanized and remain reasonable?

    Can reason be humanized and remain reasonable?

    The pre-Socratic, which became the traditional view of rationality, was that thinking was essentially contemplative action; thinking was regarded as an unmediated interfacing between the thinker and the object of thought. This tradition also drew a distinct line between theoretical and practical thinking.

    Aristotle considered practical thinking was human action whereas theory was a communion with the divine. Man was considered to be essentially a theoretical being guided by a search for truth. Only when practical concerns were bracketed could this communion take place.

    “It is worth noting that for Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, and even Spinoza, desires and passions were not original properties of the human soul but the ‘disturbances’ it suffered as a result of its union with the body and which it could and should constantly endeavor to transcend.”

    The first attack on this traditional view was via Hobbes, refined by Locke and the French Enlightenment. They argued that man was essentially a practical creature constantly in search for happiness. As Voltaire said “the passions are the wheels which make all these machines go”.

    The second line of attack came from Hegel and Kant. Kant said that it was the perceiver that placed order upon the universe and that the knower could not know the thing-in-itself, i.e. reality is out there but we can not know it in any absolute fashion. Reality for us is the reality we create in response to our inner cognitive process driven by the sensations from the world out there.

    Hegel argued that human thought was “culturally and historically conditioned and could not transcend the categories and assumptions of its time.”

    “Marx married liberal psychology to Hegel’s historicism…Human thought was determined by interest…not in individual but in socio-historical terms…Each individual thought, he believed, in terms of the categories characteristic of his class…Such limited and distorted thought Marx called ideology.”

    Ideology is the BIG problem of our times and the BIG question is ‘can the historically naïve traditional theory of the rational model be revised without destroying rationality completely?’ In other words can rationality be recovered from its heavenly haunts and be placed securely and solely within the human world without losing the positive aspect of reason.

    Many humans express this common sense view of belonging to a supernatural world through their religious belief; however, even those who are not religious are often captives of the mind/body dichotomy that is so prevalent in Western philosophy.

    I think that to deal effectively with this paradox we must become sophisticated enough to comprehend its source and to modify it at that point or not at all.

    Cognitive science has introduced a new way of viewing the world and our self by declaring a new paradigm which is called the embodied mind. The primary focus is upon the fact that there is no mind/body duality but that there is indeed an integrated mind and body. The mind and body are as integrated as is the heart and the cardiovascular system. Mind and body form a gestalt (a structure so integrated as to constitute a functional unit with properties not derivable by summation of its parts).

    The human thought process is dominated by the characteristic of our integrated body. The sensorimotor neural network is an integral part of mind. The neural network that makes movement and perception possible is the same network that processes our thinking.

    Quotes from Knowledge and Belief in Politics: The Problem of Ideology edited by Robert Benewick, R. N. Berki, and Bhikhu Parekh

  2. #2
    Perfect Gentleman! =D d@v3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Posts
    2,830

    Default

    No.

  3. #3
    rawr Costrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LII
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    No.
    "All humour has a foundation of truth."
    - Costrin

  4. #4
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Is there an un-humanized version of reason?

  5. #5
    it's a nuclear device antireconciler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    Intj
    Enneagram
    5w4 so
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    867

    Default

    Yes, necessarily.

    Reason itself is embodied. That's just what it means to say the universe is rational. The universe is necessarily rational because the human mind cannot postulate the opposite without contradicting itself and returning to the prior premise. It no sooner says "but the mind cannot grasp it ..." than it contradicts itself.

    The human mind is itself rational, for in no other way could it perceive contradiction. Indeed, it can perceive nothing except contradiction, for it can perceive nothing except contrasts and opposites. Things ARE because they are NOT something else.

    How should it then be surprising if the human mind always uses sensory maps in its every process, and that this is what it means to be reasonable? What is reasonable but what externalizes itself?
    ~ a n t i r e c o n c i l e r
    What is death, dies.
    What is life, lives.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    336

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Is there an un-humanized version of reason?

    The traditional Western view is that we humans are part material and part spiritual. The spiritual is part of another kingdom that is not material.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    336

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by antireconciler View Post
    Yes, necessarily.

    Reason itself is embodied. That's just what it means to say the universe is rational. The universe is necessarily rational because the human mind cannot postulate the opposite without contradicting itself and returning to the prior premise. It no sooner says "but the mind cannot grasp it ..." than it contradicts itself.

    The human mind is itself rational, for in no other way could it perceive contradiction. Indeed, it can perceive nothing except contradiction, for it can perceive nothing except contrasts and opposites. Things ARE because they are NOT something else.

    How should it then be surprising if the human mind always uses sensory maps in its every process, and that this is what it means to be reasonable? What is reasonable but what externalizes itself?
    You are correct but your view is not the view of most people. Traditional Western tradition is of the dichotomy of mind and body.

Similar Threads

  1. Can this be the reason why Ns think that sensors are "stupid" ?
    By Virtual ghost in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 120
    Last Post: 03-10-2015, 05:02 PM
  2. Can you be literal and still be an N?
    By prplchknz in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 01-08-2012, 03:02 AM
  3. [ISTP] Can ISTPs be cruel and unempathic?
    By cooliogirly1000 in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-06-2009, 01:36 PM
  4. Can one be an athiest and an INFP?
    By Sahara in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-25-2009, 10:17 PM
  5. Can you be nice and still get things done?
    By wolfy in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 04-03-2009, 01:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO