Reason Seen More as Weapon Than Path to Truth

[Gerald]

For centuries thinkers have assumed that the uniquely human capacity for reasoning has existed to let people reach beyond mere perception and reflex in the search for truth. Rationality allowed a solitary thinker to blaze a path to philosophical, moral and scientific enlightenment.

Now some researchers are suggesting that reason evolved for a completely different purpose: to win arguments. Rationality, by this yardstick (and irrationality too, but we’ll get to that) is nothing more or less than a servant of the hard-wired compulsion to triumph in the debating arena. According to this view, bias, lack of logic and other supposed flaws that pollute the stream of reason are instead social adaptations that enable one group to persuade (and defeat) another. Certitude works, however sharply it may depart from the truth.

The idea, labeled the argumentative theory of reasoning, is the brainchild of French cognitive social scientists, and it has stirred excited discussion (and appalled dissent) among philosophers, political scientists, educators and psychologists, some of whom say it offers profound insight into the way people think and behave. The Journal of Behavioral and Brain Sciences devoted its April issue to debates over the theory, with participants challenging everything from the definition of reason to the origins of verbal communication.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/15/ar...me&ref=general


Note: Published: June 14, 2011

[Feuer Frei!]

A very apt article for the posters of the GT section.

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Feuer Frei!

A very apt article for the posters of the GT section.

....and What do you expect from GT!

[Sailor Steve]

I don't see it. But then, I consider reason and memory both to be a curse.

[yubba]

A wise man once said, if you can't dazzle them, with brillance, baffle them with bull sh-t .

[Castout]

Reason ideally is path to truth and understanding and revelation AND STILL IS(So I disagree with the article conclusion).

However that only applies to honest and sincere and rational people.


Many people and I believe it's human nature that mankind are irrational beings, especially unpolished people(unpolished in spirit and soul). They seek justifications even when there's none. They seek to blame and find excuses and when none is actually there then proceeded to MAKE excuses using their own perverted reasoning and lying.

To some people this has grown even so sophisticated that they don't even realize it any longer that they are lying to themselves.

In short they lie and even convinced themselves that's true.

To argue with such people to make them see true reason is POINTLESS, FRUSTRATING and USELESS. These are fools no matter what their credentials are or how much money they have in their bank account.

In the end the prerequisite in any communication (as all communication essence is to see reason and gain understanding) are HONESTY, SINCERITY and OBJECTIVITY.

When none is present it might be as well called PROPAGANDA, POLITICKING, OUTRIGHT LYING or DECEIT

To be honest socially perhaps the average people(at least here) may be politicking more than being genuine. Those people who change their disposition in public or in private aren't they just keeping their manner and hospitality out of fear of being disliked? To Asians maintaining your face(honor) is considered so important that so often these people forget that it is their OWN ACTION and CONDUCT that they must guard instead anybody or anything else. I call these people the little children. Always unpolished people. They want to steal without being called a thief, they want to kill without being called a murderer, they want to lie without being called a liar, they want to live without adhering to honorable code of conduct yet they want to be respected and even praised for their [non existent] honor.

[tater]

Reason is adaptive for a number of reasons. It's certainly plausible that interpersonal interactions were a primary factor. Look at Gorillas. They are intelligent, but are in fact primate "cows." They sit around and eat. They have zero need of intelligence. The evolved intelligence because they live in social groups with complex interpersonal politics, and the ability to "plot" was clearly adaptive.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Castout

Reason ideally is path to truth and understanding and revelation AND STILL IS(So I disagree with the article conclusion).

Yes, but how is it that it doesn't arrive there? How do we know anything? Have we actually learned 'truth and understanding' by means of reason, or are we simply stuck in endless cycles of received wisdom and categories of reason/understanding whose origins we can't trace, but which we nevertheless repeat uncritically?

I would disagree with the article, but perhaps on somewhat different grounds. At some point maybe that is why reason developed, but we can't know when and by who it was developed. However modern reason isn't so much something that we shape, but something that shapes us. It's wired into language and society to an extent where it's difficult to get away from thinking about things in terms of reason or lack thereof, in terms that are not our own.

Otherwise the argument can certainly be made about any traditional endeavor of the mind and creativity. By the same token, 2500 years ago Plato attacked poetry for being primarily aimed at persuading and misleading people. But Plato is also much responsible for the spread of this faith in reason as an eternal, immutable form, all the while acknowledging its inacessibility and inexpressibility. And that's a fundamental problem. People easily resort to reason and claims of certain knowledge, while up to this day there's still no incontrovertible epistemology of reason that really addresses how we know anything. There is faith in reason, which isn't 'wrong' by any means, but it does invite uncritical reliance and open it to be used as a weapon indeed.

[Dan D]

Originally Posted by Vendor

...Now some researchers are suggesting that reason evolved for a completely different purpose: to win arguments....


Note: Published: June 14, 2011

"Are you kidding me?"