Are humans a rational species?

@fresco,

Dear Fresco, you say:

Quote:

@think rethink,
Smile Note that that 'I' which 'agrees with me' is equally likely to be as transient as any other since 'identities come and go'. !

[I could give you references to the literature on the impermanence of self , or the limits of 'logic', or the inevitable coexistence of contradictions, but I'll leave that up to you.]

No need t go to literature, please just give examples from the objective reality of the everyday world and life of mankind, is that all right with you?

Dear readers here, let us all sit back and await to witness what Fresco will do when he is taken out of his 'literature', to the objective reality of the world and life of mankind.

That is the blindness of thinkers like Fresco, they dwell in 'literature', instead of the objective reality of the world and life of mankind, like you and me.

A very irrational way of living life at all!

0 Replies

@fresco,

Thanks Fresco, references on all mentioned subjects will be very appreciated.

Also,
In my opinion,
actual realizations (vs beliefs), are not exposed to the whims of identity, rather identity is derived from the perceived environment and has to conform to it in order to exist and function.

And this harness like environment which dictates the behavior of identities, also evolves constantly, as defective observations are dissolved, new errors are manifested, and perception reaching new depth.

So if my agreement was merely a false claim, than I'm in total agreement with the comment.

Otherwise it might still evolve along with the evolution of its harness.

4 Replies

@think rethink,

Suggested References:
1. The transient nature of self and existentialism
google 'Gurdjieff. -Man's name is legion'
+
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaGk6S1qhz0

2.The limitations of logic.
Kosko's 'Fuzzy Thinking'.

3. Inevitability of contradiction.
Derrida's concepts of aporia and privileging

0 Replies

@think rethink,

Dear Fresco and think rethink:

Please produce four examples, not from literature, but from the objective reality of the world and life of mankind, that validate your idea, that

Quote:

that 'I' which 'agrees with me' is equally likely to be as transient as any other since 'identities come and go'. !

[I could give you references to the literature on the impermanence of self , or the limits of 'logic', or the inevitable coexistence of contradictions, but I'll leave that up to you.]

You see, you guys are always into irrationality with talking from literature, instead of from the objective reality of the world and life of mankind.

Take notice now, dear readers, Fresco will again get all rattled up and very angry as to accuse me of always repeating things, but why shouldn't I be repeating things, when he is never getting to work with me as to concur on things?

Annex

Quote:

@fresco,
Quote:
From Susmariosep:

Dear Fresco, you say:
Quote:
From Fresco]:

@think rethink,
Smile Note that that 'I' which 'agrees with me' is equally likely to be as transient as any other since 'identities come and go'. !

[I could give you references to the literature on the impermanence of self , or the limits of 'logic', or the inevitable coexistence of contradictions, but I'll leave that up to you.]

No need t go to literature, please just give examples from the objective reality of the everyday world and life of mankind, is that all right with you?

Dear readers here, let us all sit back and await to witness what Fresco will do when he is taken out of his 'literature', to the objective reality of the world and life of mankind.

That is the blindness of thinkers like Fresco, they dwell in 'literature', instead of the objective reality of the world and life of mankind, like you and me.

A very irrational way of living life at all!

0 Replies

@think rethink,

Contrary to the ramblings of the nuisance above, references play an essential part in understanding the currents in our own thinking which is covertly influenced via evolution of cognitive habits via language and culture. And by discussing (=comparing and contrasting) the literature we set up a common semantic field which is the basis of all successful communication.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Well, dear readers here, we have here an example of Fresco getting to the escape valve, instead of getting to the objective reality of the world and life of mankind.

So, I will repeat again my request to him.

Produce four examples of identity changing all the time, from the objective reality of the world and life of mankind, instead of bringing in literature.

But if you insist in living and thinking and writing all purely in the world of literature, then I have to tell you, time to get out from literature, and produce four examples from the objective reality of the world and life of mankind.

Because if you don't then you are irrational, because reason dictates that first and foremost you guys must live, and think, and write in the objective reality of the world and life of mankind, not in the literature world of say fictions.

Dear readers here, that is the curse of today's thinkers, like the generality of posters in web forums, they are to all appearances living and thinking and writing in the limbo world of fictions i.e. literature, and never coming to the objective reality of factual experiences in the world and life of mankind.

You must drag them into the objective reality of the world and life of mankind, otherwise you will end up also in their irrational living and tnhinking and writing all in te limbo world of fictions i.e. literature.

This is the way to bring them to factual reality, Insist that they produce examples from the objective reality of the world and life of mankind, in every issue they go into; when they don't come to the objective reality of the world and life of mankind, then avoid them like the plague of oral diarrhea.

Annex

Quote:

From Fresco:

@think rethink,
Contrary to the ramblings of the nuisance above, references play an essential part in understanding the currents in our own thinking which is covertly influenced via evolution of cognitive habits via language and culture. And by discussing (=comparing and contrasting) the literature we set up a common semantic field which is the basis of all successful communication.

0 Replies

Bookmark

1 Reply

@fresco,

Dear Fresco, is that your reply to me, namely, just the word: Bookmark?

Dear readers here, I need your experience with Fresco, to tell me what is Fresco after with just replying with a word, Bookmark.

Dear Fresco, no more literature on how your identity can change over time?

0 Replies

Bmark

1 Reply

@fresco,

Dear readers here, we are now witnessing a behavior that is routine with posters who have nothing of any cognitive worth to share, but who still insist on being present in a thread with transmitting nothing but a useless word.

Fresco I am sure will do nothing now except to keep to his stubborn nonsense transmission of useless alphabets, just to save his face with defiance, typical of humans who can't think except in fiction land.

This thread is on "Are humans a rational species?"

My position is that man is by nature rational, otherwise mankind would not be able to communicate among themselves; but there are recurring instances of irrational behavior with men.

Now, we are witness a recurring irrational behavior from one Fresco.

0 Replies

Bookmark

1 Reply

@fresco,

Dear readers here, there is nothing new to report to you, Fresco is still on his stubborn irrational behavior of transmitting one word which is not even a sentence, unless dear readers here, you can help me to decrypt what is his communication with transmitting only one word, Bookmark.

I will check again after two hours, to see what he will be into: Will he be still into irrational behavior, or go into his usual haunt in literature for examples on how his identity changes all the time, instead of repairing himself to the objective reality of the world and life of mankind. and start a life of rationality?

Just between you and me, dear readers here, perhaps I will try the experiment of reporting the irrational posting of Fresco, and await with bated breath to witness what will happen: Will the persons running this forum do something about the irrational behavior of Fresco, OR, instead they will scold me for disturbing them as they have got better worries to attend to, than with the irrational behavior of Fresco.

Hehehehehehehehehehe...

On the other hand, as the old saw intones, "Let sleeping dogs lie."

0 Replies

Bkmark

1 Reply

@fresco,

Okay, Fresco, very good, carry on.

I will just take notice of somebody else with a new post here, and see whether I can get him for us two to exchange thoughts on "Are humans a rational species?"

1 Reply

@Susmariosep,

Good And I will warn anybody who posts on this or any on this or any other A2K threads to avoid feeding your problem by responding to you. I suggest you get back to your 'holy joe forums' (those that will still have you) and moan about atheists. That facile activity is about as far as you appear to want to go down an 'exchange of thoughts' path.

0 Replies

Addendum:

Is it impossible from the part of some people's psychology, that they cannot change their mind, though they have the use of reason, to see that they are wrong in their view on an issue?

Paging the author of this thread, one think rethink, what do you say?

Let you and me do this experiment, you tell me something that is really to your rational assessment to be correct, and explain to me why it is correct; then we will see whether I will concur with you, or 'argue' on and on and on forever.

Okay, dear readers here, let us all sit back and await with bated breath to witness whether think rethink will take up my proposal, for the man is the author of the present thread, "Are humans a rational species?"

So, he must have some idea(s) he wishes to share with the rest of mankind, which he sees from his rational nature to be the correct views.

Yes, that is correct, I am in the business of 'phishing' for fellow rational beings to exchange thoughts with me on any issue they figure they know something about, and care to share with the rest of mankind, like one Susmariosep.

0 Replies

Bookmark

1 Reply

@fresco,

Noted,

1 Reply

@think rethink,

I should perhaps have made clear to you that on the 'impermanence of self' point:
-Gurdjieff was an esotericist espousing a weird cosmology, but nevertheless some very down to earth psychological observations.
-Heidegger on the other hand was a phenomenologist interested in 'authentic living'. The tragedy with him was that he got sucked in by the Nazis, and despite being defended by his Jewish girlfriend after the war, never quite regained his status as a philosophical genius.

2 Replies

@Susmariosep,

Bookmark

0 Replies

Are humans a rational species?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know