• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

On the Human condition

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I can’t make this short and simple, but I’ll try to explain:

I found the entire argument based on a world made up of reflective people. Yes, people are able to reflect and deliberate (that’s what makes us human), BUT I don’t think people do it on default. Often when people face dilemmas, they act out of instinct, not thought. .

Such actions are a result of their thoughts or lack thereof. If they act on instinct it means that their worldview does not include a maxim which ought to prevent them from acting out on instinct. Or perhaps they have a maxim that it is okay to act out on instincts, and regard such a principle as a truism. For this reason, they think they need not even think things through when they wish to act on instinct, they just go for it.

With that said the principle of human psychology I've established still holds. Their irrational behavior (in this case as you mention, actions that are inspired by impulses) are a result of an irrational worldview which has resulted from unsound communication between them and their instructors and likely their unsound analysis of the instructions which has likely inscribed undesirable maxims into their belief systems. Such ethical principles have likely been so thoroughly imbued in their psyche that they appear second nature to them and thus manifest in the form of impulses.

As aforementioned, another way this phenomenon could be observed is also due to irrational thinking, or some kind of flaws in reasoning. That is lacking sound maxims which ought to prevent one from acting out on impulses. A rational thinker would carefully analyze the situation and establish the sound maxims.
 

Anja

New member
Joined
May 2, 2008
Messages
2,967
MBTI Type
INFP
I am befuddled about how you can make so many statements of absolute fact from your observations, BlueWing.

How can you rationally have no self doubt? Seems to tread on dangerous ground to me.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I am befuddled about how you can make so many statements of absolute fact from your observations, BlueWing.

How can you rationally have no self doubt? Seems to tread on dangerous ground to me.

This is how deductive logic works. Something either is or is not, no room for moosh. Premises or the reasoning process however are fallible and may be altered at any time, should it be shown that they contain an error.
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
I didn't read the whole thread.

Bluewing how do you gauge rationality and efficient solution? How do you decide what is or is not self affirmation?


In short factual sentenses please
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
I am befuddled about how you can make so many statements of absolute fact from your observations, BlueWing.

How can you rationally have no self doubt? Seems to tread on dangerous ground to me.

It is in the wording
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I didn't read the whole thread.

Bluewing how do you gauge rationality and efficient solution? How do you decide what is or is not self affirmation?



1)Some propositions are arguments other are not. Thus if one is to attempt to persuade us, he must make an argument, otherwise his point is unclear.
2)Arguments must be logically consistent
3)Premises must be based on observable phenomena

This is what constitutes a sound or you could say rational argument, that is a fundamental fact of elementary logic.

What is self affirmation? Any positive statement with regard to our well being. Nothing wrong with this as long as we rely on our own thinking to acquire this rather than the instructions of others.
 

phoenix13

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
1,293
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w8
Such actions are a result of their thoughts or lack thereof. If they act on instinct it means that their worldview does not include a maxim which ought to prevent them from acting out on instinct. Or perhaps they have a maxim that it is okay to act out on instincts, and regard such a principle as a truism. For this reason, they think they need not even think things through when they wish to act on instinct, they just go for it.

With that said the principle of human psychology I've established still holds. Their irrational behavior (in this case as you mention, actions that are inspired by impulses) are a result of an irrational worldview which has resulted from unsound communication between them and their instructors and likely their unsound analysis of the instructions which has likely inscribed undesirable maxims into their belief systems. Such ethical principles have likely been so thoroughly imbued in their psyche that they appear second nature to them and thus manifest in the form of impulses.
As aforementioned, another way this phenomenon could be observed is also due to irrational thinking, or some kind of flaws in reasoning. That is lacking sound maxims which ought to prevent one from acting out on impulses. A rational thinker would carefully analyze the situation and establish the sound maxims.

Interesting. So you believe the impulses must go through the psyche before being expressed... that the impulse is only expressed if the psyche has left a hole through which it can slip through ("maxim that it is okay to act out on instincts"). I can't disprove that.
My question to you is do you think non-human animals hold maxims? If this rational psyche is unique to humans as a latter evoutionary adaption, I'd think it would not be necessary for action.
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
So all of your observations are based as an argument to persuade?

Is the OP an argument?

Are you looking for self affirmation or learning? Or neither in which case what is your motivation?
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Interesting. So you believe the impulses must go through the psyche before being expressed... that the impulse is only expressed if the psyche has left a hole through which it can slip through ("maxim that it is okay to act out on instincts"). I can't disprove that.
My question to you is do you think non-human animals hold maxims? If this rational psyche is unique to humans as a latter evoutionary adaption, I'd think it would not be necessary for action.


No, non-human animals do not consciously hold maxims. However, their mindset could be described in terms of ethical maxims, primarily lack thereof.

The most animal like human would be the one who is coarse and unreflective. Who simply acts on whim. This without a doubt is a reflection of his ethic. In this respect animals do have 'maxims'.

So all of your observations are based as an argument to persuade?

Is the OP an argument?

Are you looking for self affirmation or learning? Or neither in which case what is your motivation?

Learning. The term persuade was used figuratively, as a notion to distinguish between a good and a bad argument. It goes like this. A good argument is one that is sound. When you want to make a point like this, you suggest that they should only believe what is sound to give the listener an idea of what 'sound' means. From the standpoint of pure logic it does not matter what anyone believes, it only matters whether the argument in itself is sound or not.

The OP is an argument yes because it contains clear-cut premises and a clear-cut conclusion.

Interesting. So you believe the impulses must go through the psyche before being expressed... ?

It is manifest to me that our behaviors are a manifestation of our internal mindset. The only alternative to this that one could envisage is if our behavior is not inspired by our minds (which inhere within us) but somehow are controlled by an external entity. Not even that works. As even in the case of robots the external signals are filtered through the system which inheres within the robot. So...I dont get it again...:huh:
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
You referenced to people being irrational, how is that so if they are not activly trying to persuade people? In what situations do you base your arguments because the the OP while consistant to a point is circumstantial.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
You referenced to people being irrational, how is that so if they are not activly trying to persuade people? In what situations do you base your arguments because the the OP while consistant to a point is circumstantial.

The principle established was not circumstancial but that of human nature by and large.

I do not ask why certain people at a certain time behave irrationally. I ask, with all things considered, what is the underlying cause of irrational behavior?
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
Well by your deffinition of rational behavior I would say that you severly limited yourself to those who go through life with the consious decision to prove something

I dont believe this is the majority
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Well by your deffinition of rational behavior I would say that you severly limited yourself to those who go through life with the consious decision to prove something

I dont believe this is the majority

Prove something? Now I am completely lost...I thought you got the point that the term 'persuasion' in relevance to argument was only a convenience of communication. Rationality in itself has little to do with this, read my previous reply to you.
 

phoenix13

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2008
Messages
1,293
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w8
No, non-human animals do not consciously hold maxims. However, their mindset could be described in terms of ethical maxims, primarily lack thereof.

The most animal like human would be the one who is coarse and unreflective. Who simply acts on whim. This without a doubt is a reflection of his ethic. In this respect animals do have 'maxims'.

Fine. I think I better understand what you mean.
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
Prove something? Now I am completely lost...I thought you got the point that the term 'persuasion' in relevance to argument was only a convenience of communication. Rationality in itself has little to do with this, read my previous reply to you.

That is why I asked you to define rationality. How do you gauge what is or is not rational via behavior.

I understand your post I am wondering where the deduction came from.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
That is why I asked you to define rationality. How do you gauge what is or is not rational via behavior.

I understand your post I am wondering where the deduction came from.

Rational is to be defined as logically consistent and founded on premises that could be observed in the external world. One need not make arguments to be rational. It would be helpful however if they did, as this way we can clearly see if they are being rational or not as their views would be out in the open for us to observe.
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
Ok so since....... my argument is this, there is no irrational behavior because that which makes sense is subjective to individual perception. In order to constitute what is irrational behavior one must first define the context of irrationality or the social norm. The argument is too broad. Without defining what the behavior is, there is no way to tell why one thing causes all specific reaction. If that was your intention then I dissagree with your argument. Or rather that your argument could have the word irrational replaced with any other given discription of behavior in order to render the statement a well defined argument.


I was trying to narrow it down

Self affirmation and misscommunication is not the cause of irrational behavior it is the cause of almost all behavior.

Perception, interpretation, and reaction

That is a rational process.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Ok so since....... my argument is this, there is no irrational behavior because that which makes sense is subjective to individual perception. In order to constitute what is irrational behavior one must first define the context of irrationality or the social norm. The argument is too broad. Without defining what the behavior is, there is no way to tell why one thing causes all specific reaction. If that was your intention then I dissagree with your argument. Or rather that your argument could have the word irrational replaced with any other given discription of behavior in order to render the statement a well defined argument.


I was trying to narrow it down

Self affirmation and misscommunication is not the cause of irrational behavior it is the cause of almost all behavior.

Perception, interpretation, and reaction

That is a rational process.

My point was, if people organized their thoughts rationally, they would make less mistakes.

Irrational behavior however is as follows. When someone wishes to carry out a plan, and their strategy for doing so either contains contradictory propositions or their premises are founded on notions that cannot be accepted as accurate.

On this note there is indeed irrational behavior as obviously there are people who hold erroneous notions as a result of errors in reasoning.
 
T

ThatGirl

Guest
My point was, if people organized their thoughts rationally, they would make less mistakes.

Irrational behavior however is as follows. When someone wishes to carry out a plan, and their strategy for doing so either contains contradictory propositions or their premises are founded on notions that cannot be accepted as accurate.

On this note there is indeed irrational behavior as obviously there are people who hold erroneous notions as a result of errors in reasoning.

And again rationality is subjective to motivation, purpose, and interpretation.

Some of the greatest achievements have been made through trial and error.

It is in such boxes that reason losses all meaning.
 
Top