|
|
Post by Dragon*of*Heaven on Jan 31, 2006 13:12:25 GMT -5
Proposition: Men should be ruled by reason not their emotions! Do you all agree?
|
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on Jan 31, 2006 15:57:54 GMT -5
It sounds like a good, simple proposition. Unfortunately it is so much more complicated than that. But it isn't a bad proposition either.
|
|
GodsAreUs
Seasoned Citizen
If you fail to question anything, you may be had by everything.
Posts: 215
|
Post by GodsAreUs on Jan 31, 2006 16:42:33 GMT -5
I agree with Squid. You can rule with just reason, but that kind of throws "the pursuit of happiness" out the window. Since happiness is subjective and, undoubtedly, an emotion. A society ruled by reason might lack some serious freedoms as a result.
|
|
The Reservoir Dog
Seasoned Citizen
I'm sick of following my dreams, I'm just gonna ask where they're goin' and meet up with em' later.
Posts: 136
|
Post by The Reservoir Dog on Feb 13, 2006 16:44:31 GMT -5
Emotions dictate who we are how we think and how we act. I believe emotions do rule everything even logic, which they often defy ironically enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by vertigo on Feb 13, 2006 21:13:47 GMT -5
In other words, you guys (not Solidsquid) dispute free will. We are slave to our emotions, right?
|
|
The Reservoir Dog
Seasoned Citizen
I'm sick of following my dreams, I'm just gonna ask where they're goin' and meet up with em' later.
Posts: 136
|
Post by The Reservoir Dog on Feb 13, 2006 21:36:43 GMT -5
To be simple, yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by solidsquid on Feb 14, 2006 10:37:30 GMT -5
Maybe a more accurate proposition for what Dragon is getting at is that we should - engage in higher order thinking rather than relying primarily upon only low order thinking and heuristics. However, feel free correct me if I'm wrong in my assumption.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dragon*of*Heaven on Feb 14, 2006 11:06:02 GMT -5
No SolidSquid as is usual you don't disappoint when it comes to putting things better than I. You are quite correct.
Persuade of happiness goes out the window, but if done correctly this is only temporary I assure you. All actions and decisions taken as a hole, I am sure that you all would agree with me that more often than not a decision thought about rationally yields in the long run far more happiness than one that is focused on emotion. It is then a reasonable statement to say that a man who lets his reason rule him is in the end promoting the greatest good for all correct? If true then your idea of "pursuit of happiness" comes back in the end.
|
|
|
|
Post by audioinput on Feb 20, 2006 12:25:51 GMT -5
Oh, you need a bit of both. Without emotion, life is no fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by vertigo on Feb 20, 2006 14:13:36 GMT -5
I think this is conceptually flawed. It's like saying "if my mother had had an abortion, I would not have been born, I'm so glad she didn't". This comparison is invalid, existence can not be said to be better or worse than nonexistence because nonexistence is not existence. One must exist to experience something as better or worse.
Without emotion, there would be no negative emotions. You would not experience boredom or sadness, so it can't be said to be worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by necroshine on Feb 21, 2006 6:01:02 GMT -5
I think most men, the ones that count. The ones that run a country are ruled by greed not emotions or least of all reason. Look at bush. Pure greed and what he wants is all that is leading him. This is supposed to be a good christen man. Give me a brake. The same goes for the other leaders around the world. Greed is the strongest force driving man. At least that is what I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dragon*of*Heaven on Feb 27, 2006 19:46:23 GMT -5
I think that this idea is flawed. Where dose greed come from. A lust for power. There for the lust for power is the most signifigant driveing force not greed.
|
|
|
|
Post by necroshine on Feb 28, 2006 6:38:08 GMT -5
it all goes hand in hand.
they wnat money, they want to be written down in history, they want to write history, they want power. to have all that you have to have greed. you have to have the want that can not be sastisfied. but we are just talking about words. i would think the idea of it all we would agree on.
|
|
bare
Maverick's Chew Toy
Posts: 47
|
Post by bare on Mar 3, 2006 11:05:02 GMT -5
there is no reason without emotion
never has been
never will be
for the simple fact that reason (im taking this as the thinking process) is constantly changing with the emotions. To separate the two would be to neuter your humanity.
Ghandi reasoned
Hitler reasoned
neither of these men were mindless followers
each reached extreamly different reasonings on life!
|
|
|
|
Post by necroshine on Mar 4, 2006 7:32:50 GMT -5
Both ghandi and Hitler was extremists. That is not a good example to point at.
It goes to reason that we need to live in peace. Without emotion to interfere with this you will live peacefully with the people around you.
When you bring emotion into it along with the bible people will not live in peace. People will want to tell you how to live and what you should do. Reason has gone out the door.
1 It is wrong to take what is not yours.
2 But I deserve to have more than what I have.
3 So it is ok to take a little as long as it is not missed.
Without the emotion of self worth in that you have to stop at the first line. Emotion will let you bend anything to suite your wants.
humans need some emotions. But I’m not so sure that reason needs the emotion.
|
|
