Why Listen to Reason?

[Received]

I mean, srsly.

But WAIT!

Before you respond, know that a response is giving a reason, which is begging the question.

So...

What's the deal with that? Seems like reason rests on arational (or irrational) foundations.

 

[QueSi]

I mean, srsly.

But WAIT!

Before you respond, know that a response is giving a reason, which is begging the question.

So...

What's the deal with that? Seems like reason rests on arational (or irrational) foundations.

Because it's the only thing talking.

 

[Davian]

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, science is the worst way to investigate reality, but all the others have been tried.

 

[ChristianT]

Why not? There's no reason not to listen to reason. And if there was, there's no reason either way to listen to it or not. Hence why we have scientists, the average person, and that guy that says reason and evidence of anything is worthless.

 

[Received]

What I'm saying with the OP is that using a reasonable response to talk about reason is begging the question, because what you're questioning (reason) is inherent to your response (which uses reason).

So, there's gotta be something deeper than reason that keeps us using it. Maybe you could call this intuition; that is, we intuitively feel that reason is something worth keeping. Or maybe reason makes us happy -- that's a psychological push toward reason.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I mean, srsly.

But WAIT!

Before you respond, know that a response is giving a reason, which is begging the question.

So...

What's the deal with that? Seems like reason rests on arational (or irrational) foundations.

Because God says so.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

What I'm saying with the OP is that using a reasonable response to talk about reason is begging the question, because what you're questioning (reason) is inherent to your response (which uses reason).

So, there's gotta be something deeper than reason that keeps us using it. Maybe you could call this intuition; that is, we intuitively feel that reason is something worth keeping. Or maybe reason makes us happy -- that's a psychological push toward reason.

Well, to paraphrase Hawking, reason wins because it works. Humans are pattern-recognising creatures, and that is the foundation of logic and reason.

 

[Received]

Well, to paraphrase Hawking, reason wins because it works. Humans are pattern-recognising creatures, and that is the foundation of logic and reason.

Excellent!

So reason has pragmatic foundations. Let's extend this: all of reasoning, all of thinking, all of wondering about the universe, is ultimately for something that "works". And could this "works" mean "what makes us happy?"

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Excellent!

So reason has pragmatic foundations. Let's extend this: all of reasoning, all of thinking, all of wondering about the universe, is ultimately for something that "works". And could this "works" mean "what makes us happy?"

More, "What is true?". Humans can apply this knowledge to make us happy, but the first step is to ascertain the truth, whatever the truth may be. Then, we can exploit it.

 

[Received]

More, "What is true?". Humans can apply this knowledge to make us happy, but the first step is to ascertain the truth, whatever the truth may be. Then, we can exploit it.

But what I'm saying is that the foundation of truth -- what makes us value truth in the first place -- is precisely the belief that makes us happy.

Extending this, we seem to believe the universe is a pretty optimistic place if we believe that truth, at whatever cost, is happiness-inducing. Bit of a leap of faith, it seems.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

But what I'm saying is that the foundation of truth -- what makes us value truth in the first place -- is precisely the belief that makes us happy.

Extending this, we seem to believe the universe is a pretty optimistic place if we believe that truth, at whatever cost, is happiness-inducing. Bit of a leap of faith, it seems.

I don't think we believe that it's necessarily happiness-inducing, merely that we've decided to be happy at the discovery of truth. I read books because I enjoy it, but the book is ultimately just pulp, glue, and ink. The truth about the universe has been something of an existential shift to the human race - we once believed by faith that we were the centre, figuratively and literally, of a universe created just for us. Now, it seems, we're a chance product on an ordinary planet around a middle-aged star in one of many galaxies.

We relish this truth, however. It's not inherently a happy truth, but that it is the truth is enough to make us happy to discover it.

 

[quatona]

I mean, srsly.

But WAIT!

Before you respond, know that a response is giving a reason, which is begging the question.

Seems like you are equivocating the different meanings of "reason" and "a reason" here.
"Because it feels good.", for example, would give a reason - whereas it´s not exactly an answer that "listens to reason".
(That one was easy to spot for me, because in German we have two completely distinct words for "reason" and "a reason".)

So...

What's the deal with that? Seems like reason rests on arational (or irrational) foundations.

Ok. So this is the thread where we are invited to respond unreasonably to your question?

 

[quatona]

What I'm saying with the OP is that using a reasonable response to talk about reason is begging the question, because what you're questioning (reason) is inherent to your response (which uses reason).

Are you trying to be reasonable here? Why would even try to - in a thread that´s supposed to deconstruct the value of reason?

So, there's gotta be something deeper than reason that keeps us using it. Maybe you could call this intuition; that is, we intuitively feel that reason is something worth keeping. Or maybe reason makes us happy -- that's a psychological push toward reason.

Sounds like a well-reasoned idea. Why should I listen to it?

 

[variant]

I mean, srsly.

But WAIT!

Before you respond, know that a response is giving a reason, which is begging the question.

So...

What's the deal with that? Seems like reason rests on arational (or irrational) foundations.

Reasoning is justified by results.

 

[Gottservant]

Reason is the Inevitable, encapsulated in a thought.

To face the Inevitable, without Reason, is to be torn asunder.

To refuse to listen to the Inevitable, is to seal one's fate with fools.

 

[Received]

Seems like you are equivocating the different meanings of "reason" and "a reason" here.
"Because it feels good.", for example, would give a reason - whereas it´s not exactly an answer that "listens to reason".
(That one was easy to spot for me, because in German we have two completely distinct words for "reason" and "a reason".)

Hmm. To me, "a" reason is an application of "reason". I'll have to think about this.

Ok. So this is the thread where we are invited to respond unreasonably to your question?

Aha! Maybe the question is unreasonable by being asked. But I don't think that negates the point: reason can only go so far before we see the foundation on which it rests -- which to me is the very much phenomenological experience of intuition that says, as it were, "reason is good," each time we use it.

 

[quatona]

Hmm. To me, "a" reason is an application of "reason". I'll have to think about this.

Ok. I think it´s a very important decision. It seems to me that for something to be called "a reason" it needn´t be reasonable.

Aha! Maybe the question is unreasonable by being asked.

No, that was not my point. My point was: Are you expecting reasonable answers, or will you accept unreasonable or ill-reasoned ones as valid answers?

But I don't think that negates the point: reason can only go so far before we see the foundation on which it rests -- which to me is the very much phenomenological experience of intuition that says, as it were, "reason is good," each time we use it.

Yes, something like that. I guess I´d rather call it extrapolation from experience.

Personally, I think that in the field of epistemology there is no alternative to reason, and that´s the reason why its value is undisputed.
When it comes to decision making, I have my doubts that reason plays as big a part as we like to think. I tend to think that we make our decisions quick, early, and intuitively - and then spend a lot of time rationalizing ourselves towards the already made decision.
As far as treating our fellow humans is concerned, in my opinion reason is not the unquestionably top criterium.

 

[variant]

Aha! Maybe the question is unreasonable by being asked. But I don't think that negates the point: reason can only go so far before we see the foundation on which it rests -- which to me is the very much phenomenological experience of intuition that says, as it were, "reason is good," each time we use it.

Reason is part of the process that makes brains in the first place, our brains are built upon the supposition that the future will bare some resemblance to the past. I don't think it is possible to throw aside something that is involved in the very architecture of the system trying to justify it.

If reason is bad then so are brains. The mere action of analytical thought requires you use a system that relies upon reason.

The external justification is that brains work.

 

[dlamberth]

If reason is bad then so are brains.

For myself, reason isn't bad, but it does becomes more powerful and insightful when it follows the heart brain information it receives.

.

 

[Received]

Reason is part of the process that makes brains in the first place, our brains are built upon the supposition that the future will bare some resemblance to the past. I don't think it is possible to throw aside something that is involved in the very architecture of the system trying to justify it.

If reason is bad then so are brains. The mere action of analytical thought requires you use a system that relies upon reason.

The external justification is that brains work.

Yes, and saying brains "work" is to go beyond reason, which is what I'm talking about. There comes a point when we accept reasoning intuitively, or "just because," for no other reason than because it *feels* right. In terms of evolution, you could say that reason is an instinct, and an instinct is a sort of starting point or the very substance of self-evident stuff.