A Question of Rationality

[Mushin]

Rationality is often considered to be one of the basic processes of a human’s intellectual functioning. Rationality is humanity’s way of understanding. Since humankind’s beginning it has used rationality in order to survive and in order to progress. Rationality is the basis for all progress of the human species. Initially progress was slow, for individual survival and betterment were the main concerns of early peoples. As the concept of property and the ideas of science started to develop into infancy human relations begin to intensify in vastness and intricacy. With these expansions humans created a need for language, writing and an alphabet. Language distinguished humans from all other species and it was this distinction that ensured the progress of human rationality.
Most of these thoughts are based on Condorcet’s “Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind.”
By showing the history of humankind Condorcet puts a mirror in front of his audience and shows them that this is what they are, that they are the product of rationality. He shows his audience that they and all the people before them have been working to ensure progress that all societies are working to towards a goal, a truth, a happiness. Rationality is our pursuit of perfection.
This goal of perfection is particularly radical and optimistic, for Condorcet’s ideas propose that man through reason can and will eventually reach a state of godliness. This perfection will be reached when nature and the progress of knowledge and rationality have spread to the masses through universal language.
This belief in the persistence progress of rationality clashed well… with my many of my own ideas. A sentiment more in agreement with my own thought is found in Nietzsche’s work, “Rationality ex post facto.- Whatever lives long is gradually so saturated with reason that its irrational origins become improbable.” Here rationality is viewed not as a way to perfection but as a means of escape from reality. His statement argues that rationality is used only to explain things after they have happened, to cover up their chaotic beginnings.
It seems to me that western thought has overly embraced rationality in defiance of art, faith, and spirituality and thus in doing so losing an integral part of humanity. I am not suggesting that we should do away with rationality but rather find a balance between the rational and the irrational and embrace knowledge for the sake of knowledge and not only focus on what is immediately useful.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Mushin you obviously are wanting to lead this thread in a direction that you have in mind by inviting the followiing response.

At first read the immediate response is to argure that you are suggesting that a rational man must or should allow irrationality to exist in his life as a way of "Balancing".

I feel that you are suggesting something a little deeper and give you the benefit of the doubt.

To me rationality is a response that we give in the face of fear, or more precisely the fear of Irrationality.
In some circles irrationality equates with words like insanity or chaos or disorder.

Rationality does not always lead to sanity. In fact mis-guided rationality is the hallmark of intelligent insanity and can be seen as such by others but not so by the believer in his own rationality. eg Sept 11th

It is true that the over use of rationality can stifle spontaneity and certain freedoms of expression and that to over rationalise can lead to a somewhat colourless existence. But should we allow insanity just for our entertainment I ask?

Spontaneity and acting on impulse does not have to be irrational and can quite comfortably fall with in a range of rational behaviours that are acceptable to the society at large.

You suggest that we allow irrationality ( to wit art, faith and spirituality) to co-exist and not just strive for immediate gain.
I am not sure why you consider these three attributes to be irrational.

I wish to ask you how irrationality can possibly benefit us whether immediate or not so immediate?

And also I wish to suggest that the humanity that you fear we are losing is not worth saving as it is our insanity that we are removing and leaving behind and striving for a more happier existence with out it.