[FoRK] Lion, rationality, reason, and seriousness

Stephen D. Williams <sdw at lig.net> on Wed May 9 15:43:02 PDT 2007

Lion Kimbro wrote:
> On 5/9/07, Jeff Bone <jbone at place.org> wrote:
>> Let me get this straight --- you're fine w/ folks being passionate,
>> as long as what they're passionate about is not rationality, because
>> that would be irrational?
>
>  No-no-no!  That's quite cool!
>  Very excited about that!
>  Right there with ya'!
>
>
>  But I'm saying, "passion/care/concern/interest/love/desire/..."
>  is what's motivating that rationality.
All of those passions should have a rational basis.  Your goals in life 
should have a rational basis.  This is part of what the last several 
discussions were about.
>   The only reason rationality is of interest, is because it
>  serves a passion.  Just that recognition-- that's what I think I
>  was aiming for.
Reason -> passion -> reason works fine.  Loops are fine.  The base 
should be reason however, not passion.  Otherwise it could be:

Random thought / cultural imperative -> passion -> parrational reason -> 
suicide bombers / wasted humanity

>   We shouldn't go saying, "Well, passion is bad, because it's
>  not reasonable."  When the motor behind reason is, itself,
>  "passion." (Care, concern, interest, desire, ...)
And what's behind passion?  Random chance?  Evolutionary bias to do 
something?  ("Instincts")
I know, I know, it's turtles all the way down.

sdw
>
>
>> PS - you were doing great until this last bit.  Shark jump, ya know?
>> Gotta watch out for that.
>
>  OK.  {;)}=  No "moral of the story" at the conclusion.
>  I'll just write that in my little book here...


More information about the FoRK mailing list