brynndragon

I think you're very, very right.

When I was dealing with some serious jealousy issues with Nic, I kept saying that my reactions bothered me because they weren't logical. I never really thought about it until Nic mentioned it, but I tend to steer clear of emotion-laden things. Whether it be movies, tv shows, whatever.

It's taken me a while and sometimes I forget this, but I've realized that being illogical is not the same as being wrong, or being morally inferior. It simply means that you can't bring someone else along the chain of reasoning that led to the current state because there is no such chain. It's much harder to communicate accurately and precisely than logic (especially amongst geeks who tend to use logic nigh exclusively in their model of reality), but you can be far more effective at getting a point across (once you've figured out what that point might be ;P) *unless* the other person has decided that non-logic mean non-informational.

I'm tempted to say that the power of emotional understanding is precisely why people who rely on logic feel the need to denegrade it - it makes them feel like they've evened the playing field against a force that is literally invisible but astoundingly effective.

Which is exactly the argument the fundies use - this is why Newage (pronounced sewage) is the handmaiden of the Xtian right.

You come in to my journal, take a light-hearted tongue-in-cheek quote and turn it into propagandistic bullshit, and insult my intelligence and my compassion. I'm feeling generous, so I'm giving you a third chance (the second chance was the reply to my initial reply to you). Here's a quarter, buy a sense of humor or a ticket outta here, it's entirely up to you.

My comments were more caustic and severe and insulting than they sounded in my head, especially since to a stranger. I took "dons asbestos suit" to mean you were open to strong disagreement, but my reaction lacked civility and context.

You expand upon the one-liner into a longer philosophical argument for the positive side.

I've had the opposite experience - aphorisms about feelings or faith used to excuse inexcusable behavior, political or personal. The violence I've encountered has been justified with feelings.

As others point out, logic can help direct feeling. For example, this post had a strong negative connotations for me and my tone got nasty. Had I applied some logic, I would have used explanations instead of insults.

But, emotion and logic CAN work very well together, and even SHOULD work together in most instances.
Emotions often don't make much logical sense. That just is.
Logic can help make better sense of confusing or powerful emotional states, provides respect is payed to the nature of what what emotion is, as previously stated.
At least I find logic enormously helpful in grounding myself and not letting myself so caught up in whatever it is that I'm feeling that I lose sight of myself, other people, or the bigger picture. Instead of freaking out because I'm really sad, for no easily explainable reason, I can acknowledge yes, I'm sad, and then calm myself down somewhat by 'running a diagnosic'. Did I get enough sleep, is it near that time of my month, is it just an off day? Even if I can't find a reason, I can defocus further by attempting to stablize or fix things. What do I need so I don't slip down into a more depressed state? Food? Snuggles? A nap? Some alone time? A good book? Some excercise? This helps me feel more in balance. Yes, I'm not feeling so great, but I have possible clues as to why, and at the very least a plan to make things a little bit better. Thinking like this used to be very hard for me. I would become easily confused and even panic stricken by my emotions, because of how strongly they seemed to come on.
In regards to other, this line of thinking has helped me because I can often help them calm down or at least help them feel more okay about the fact that they are emotional.
Emotions tempered by logic make me feel more secure in myself and more forgiving of others.

That makes me think that emotions and logic, like science and spirituality, can be an amazing force for good and happiness when they work together rather than being at each other's throats. I've felt too much as of late that people who spend the vast majority of their existance at the logic/science end of things can't respect the emotional/spiritual end (with

the_xtina as a notable exception) and have reacted by getting massively defensive about the value of emotions and spirituality. But it should be a cooperative dynamic balance rather than a battle between the two. Hmm, I'll have to ponder this further.

Not to sound all woo woo, but the more I live and breathe the more I see how most, if not all things have a balancing point. Kind of like a knife blade when it's tempered, forged, and honed just so.
I like the phrase 'cooperative dynamic balance'. :)
I more then concur with the analogy you've made between emotions vs logic & science vs spirituality!
Darkness and light are just two little points, when there is an infinity of shades of grey in the spaces in between.

Entertainingly, I come at it from the other angle - I run those diagnostics automatically, and often dismissively, and am in the process of learning how to just let the emotions freakin' happen, sometimes.

I cry a little bit more easily, as a result, but I feel less like I need a brain enema every year, so I suppose that's a good thing.

Hey whatevah works for you! :)
Letting the emotions just happen is good too.
See, I've always cried a bit too easily for my comfort level.
And tears do not always mean sadness for me. I can cry, angry, happy, overtired . . . .I leak. By and large this is okay. But, tears can be seen as 'manipulative'. Thus I tried to learn some headspace tweaks and overrides. Getting teary, regardless of the reason can also be amazingly vulnerable. 'Emotionally naked', I say.

I cry a little bit more easily, as a result, but I feel less like I need a brain enema every year, so I suppose that's a good thing.

What a revolting mental image!

Mmmm... opiates. But wait, I thought House had Vicodin. He has Logic, too? Damn him! He needs to learn to share his drugs with the group.

(Also: I think I'm getting iller by the minute. So do I drive to the doctor, or walk? It's cold out... But I'm dizzy. Buh. Enough of a tangent, sorry.)

Again. Mmm. Opiates.

It seems like his "leaps of logic" have nothing logical about them - they're just correct ;P.

Would you like a ride to the doctor's? Throw me an e-mail with your address and I'll be there in about 10-15 minutes.

I suppose that's a way of putting it... I'd go more for like a huge-ass shield or mask, more than opiate.

/logical

*laugh* Mmmm, symbolism. But I think the author felt the need to make a reference to the infamous Marx quote that implies the opposite of what this one says ;P.

Oh, I figured as much, which is why I didn't feel like I should quibble. On the other hand, the irony of arguing with the logic of the word choice COMPELLED ME to comment. :D

*laugh* Dude, if I could give you a cookie, I would.

And science is the bastion of those to souless to trust faith.

Really, be careful where you get your solipisims, because they often echo the fascists.

You have your opiate, I have mine.

You and George W.'s crowd.

You've apparently caught me in a very good mood, as I'll let this one slide since I hadn't posted my above reply when you made this comment. But don't let it happen again.

Dude, the second quote is so much better than the first. It clearly wins. :)

Is it not awesome? :)

I dunno, aren't you supposed to boil ramen?

Not necessarily. They make a tasty crunchy snack right out of the pack, just sprinkle with the flavor packet or your own seasoning.

each tool has its domain of applicability. logic has its domain. emotions have another.

I like the second. It's funnier.

However, on a more serious note, I am fearful of any person who cannot acknowledge the strengths of both logic and emotion. There are many conclusions that can be reached by one without the other that are grave and terrible when viewed with balance.

But then I'm the logician who worries about whether I lack emotion.

Just as there is no such thing as pure chaos, merely systems so complex that they are impossible to define, so too is there no such thing as pure emotion. Emotion comes from a process of logic so complex it is impossible to define.

But for both we can make inroads to better understanding. With chaos, mathematics and quantuum physics can help model some of the less easily understood parts of the system. With emotion, psychology (especially understanding the subconscious) can help sort out why we feel the way we do.

Those who champion logic over emotion are probably ignorant of the true nature of emotion. That, or they are lazily seeking simple systems that they can cope with.

Hm.

I love the second quote, but I'm afraid the first one bothers me. A lot.

I used to be very emotion and instinct focused, for all that I was logically trained as far as academics went. I discovered the hard way that although emotions *can* be useful for below-the-conscious-level information and observations, they can also go haywire in a way that is very, very hard to debug, and when they do, you're fucked.

See, human beings are biological critters. There may or may not be some kind of non-biological mechanism (i.e. souls) involved, and I'm still working on figuring out what I think of that idea; but we are, undeniably, dependent on our biology. And when those neurotransmitters get out of whack, you get emotional junk input; depression, paranoia, mania, all sorts of things. For someone like me, who used my emotions as a tool for understanding the world around me, that can wreak total havoc on your ability to do tasks, communicate with others, or otherwise deal with the world. Worried that your friends hate you? No, that's not subtle evidence adding up; that's just fucked-up brain chemistry. Feel like getting out of bed would be a real mistake? Not internal diagnostics saying you need more sleep; just fucked-up brain chemistry.

Logic, unlike emotions, can be checked by other people. If you're making decisions *logically*, when you can't trust your brain, then you have some way of getting feedback and learning how to route around the bugs. If you're making decisions emotionally, you've got many fewer tools in your toolkit to let you fix the problem. Not to mention that many of the current 'fixes' involve artificially changing that chemistry, with associated emotional changes... and what does that mean if you're trusting your emotions to feed you truth?

I certainly wouldn't want to live in the all-logic all-the-time world that some people I know do; it would be boring and missing a whole lot of life. But don't knock logic. It probably saved my sanity, if not my life.

Logic is a refuge of those who are too afraid to be wrong to accept what might be.

Interesting quote.

And for every quote, there is an equal and opposite quote:
Logic is the lawyer of the heart

(I heard that in school, but I have no idea who the teacher was quoting)

That's quite true. People will construct wonderful arguments to prove things they already believe.

I strongly believe that the opposite is true.

Unsurprisingly, I concur.

What's unsurprising about it?

As

brynndragon and pretty much anyone else I talk to with any regularity will tell you, I express my love of logic pretty vocally. :)

Yeah, I can relate. I never really shut up about it either.

Well, then live long and prosper, my fellow pseudo-Vulcan! :D

I like

horned1's version better:

"Build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, he'll be warm the rest of his life."

(Shameless plug: available at TheHornedOne.com )

There is a sub-branch of economics devoted to the study of rational irrationality.

Just thinking about such a possibility helps explain much of human behavior.

You know, that makes me feel warm and fuzzy. Probably because my dad did econ in college and gave me many lessons in basic economic theory during the 30-45 minute drive to school.

I think one term is 'post-autistic economics'. The whole idea that everyone is a profit-maximizing sociopath named Economic Man isn't quite accurate. Although I suspect when it comes to the behaviors of corporations, it may not be too far from the truth.

Come on, any science of economic behavior that can't explain advertising is seriously flawed.

There's a perspective I'd like to suggest, that people may take or leave, and that is that logic depends on first principles, so you can make a perfectly rational argument for or against many propositions depending on your initial assumptions. If I believe that maintaining traditional values is important to the health of a society, I'm going to feel very different about anything from abortion to young people's rights (can't think of any political issues starting with z) than I will if I believe that individual freedom is paramount.

So an argument against evolution might seem perfectly rational if you take it as axiomatic that the Bible cannot be wrong.

To be honest, the whole logic versus emotion thing seemed very exciting at 15 and now just seems kind of silly. Damage to the limbic system results in all sorts of awfulness, and damage to the neocortex...well, ever seen someone with Alzheimer's? Also, attempts to rigidly regulate and deny emotion are usually motivated by emotions such as, yes, fear. I mean, if you didn't have emotions, you couldn't care about not having them, right?

just want to say, totally OT, that I saw your post on nonfluffypagans and I agree with you. I'm sorry people gave you such a hard time.

Thanks for the support. I realized once it had happened that it was an unsurprising outcome - the timing of my post within the context of some rather fluffy posts that made people very snark-happy, my poor attempt at making it a light-hearted request, my general optimism in humanity, my failure to realize that people would react poorly to being surprised to find they were being religionist, my failure to realize that people who aren't actually religionist would think it was directed at them as well. . . *shrug* It happens. Communication is hard, especially in this medium.

I think one of the worst of those "Teach a man" quotes I've seen runs like this:

"Build a man a fire, and you keep him warm for a night. Set a man on fire, and you keep him warm for the rest of his life."

QotD

no subject

no subject

Feelings burned the witches, feelings fuels the mobs

Re: Feelings burned the witches, feelings fuels the mobs

I apologize

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

I disgust myself sometimes.

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Chaos and emotion

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

study

Re: study

Re: study

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject