Re: Re: "Reason is, and ever ought to be, the slave of passion."
On passion vs reason, Romans 7:15 New International Version (NIV) 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. [Roger Clough], [rclo...@verizon.net] 12/2/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen - Receiving the following content - From: Bruno Marchal Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-12-01, 15:56:19 Subject: Re: "Reason is, and ever ought to be, the slave of passion." On 30 Nov 2012, at 19:23, meekerdb wrote: On 11/30/2012 1:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hume uses that argument as a basis for his dictum: "Reason is, and ever ought to be, the slave of passion." Meaning that one should not kill just because it is logical, etc. I agree. The heart knows, reason can. But this leads to some problem. In fact we can argue that the conflict between heart and reason is with us since the start, and is unavoidable for ever, even in heaven, even for ideally sound machines. But Hume was pointing out that there is no conflict between passion and reason. Reason can only reach decisions based on values, and it is passion that assigns values. The conflict is between different passions: work and leisure, security and adventure,... Reason gets blamed because it brings the bad news that you can't have it all. I agree, but there is still, I think, a more basic opposition between reason and passion, which is that reason can't justify a part of passion, and so reason can question some passion, and passion, most of the time hate this state of affairs. Reason and passion can have different reason, and different passion, somehow. In AUDA, or even already in UDA, it is the fact that the third person view can be in conflict with the first person view, making harder sacrifice for the collectivity, and similar "apoptosis", for example. It is the "conflict" between Bp & p, and Bp alone: it does lead to conflicting and irreducible (except with comp, at the meta-level, for ideal machine) internal views on reality. It is almost the conflict, present in the John Clark post (for example) between the truth (after duplication) that you are in M and that you are in W, and the truth that you are in only one city, or the difference between subjective 1p, and objective 3p. We need both, and we can't avoid them in any way (except perhaps dying, IF that is possible). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: "Reason is, and ever ought to be, the slave of passion."
On 30 Nov 2012, at 19:23, meekerdb wrote: On 11/30/2012 1:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hume uses that argument as a basis for his dictum: "Reason is, and ever ought to be, the slave of passion." Meaning that one should not kill just because it is logical, etc. I agree. The heart knows, reason can. But this leads to some problem. In fact we can argue that the conflict between heart and reason is with us since the start, and is unavoidable for ever, even in heaven, even for ideally sound machines. But Hume was pointing out that there is no conflict between passion and reason. Reason can only reach decisions based on values, and it is passion that assigns values. The conflict is between different passions: work and leisure, security and adventure,... Reason gets blamed because it brings the bad news that you can't have it all. I agree, but there is still, I think, a more basic opposition between reason and passion, which is that reason can't justify a part of passion, and so reason can question some passion, and passion, most of the time hate this state of affairs. Reason and passion can have different reason, and different passion, somehow. In AUDA, or even already in UDA, it is the fact that the third person view can be in conflict with the first person view, making harder sacrifice for the collectivity, and similar "apoptosis", for example. It is the "conflict" between Bp & p, and Bp alone: it does lead to conflicting and irreducible (except with comp, at the meta-level, for ideal machine) internal views on reality. It is almost the conflict, present in the John Clark post (for example) between the truth (after duplication) that you are in M and that you are in W, and the truth that you are in only one city, or the difference between subjective 1p, and objective 3p. We need both, and we can't avoid them in any way (except perhaps dying, IF that is possible). Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: "Reason is, and ever ought to be, the slave of passion."
On 11/30/2012 1:07 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hume uses that argument as a basis for his dictum: "Reason is, and ever ought to be, the slave of passion." Meaning that one should not kill just because it is logical, etc. I agree. The heart knows, reason can. But this leads to some problem. In fact we can argue that the conflict between heart and reason is with us since the start, and is unavoidable for ever, even in heaven, even for ideally sound machines. But Hume was pointing out that there is no conflict between passion and reason. Reason can only reach decisions based on values, and it is passion that assigns values. The conflict is between different passions: work and leisure, security and adventure,... Reason gets blamed because it brings the bad news that you can't have it all. Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: "Reason is and ever ought to be, the slave of passion."
Even rational knowledge is guided by passion, because "Thought by itself moves nothing" (Aristotle) including the inhability to move though itself. But passions obey hidden reasons (An evolutionary psychologist would say) 2012/9/11 Roger Clough > > Hi Jason Resch > > Faith (trust) and love trump logic every time. > If my neighbor has riches, it would be logical to > rob him blind. > > > "Reason is and ever ought to be, the slave of passion." > > David Hume > > > > > Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net > 9/11/2012 > Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him > so that everything could function." > > - Receiving the following content - > From: Jason Resch > Receiver: everything-list > Time: 2012-09-11, 08:53:41 > Subject: Re: victims of faith > > > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: >> >> But what is unique >> about religion is that its proponents make factual statements which >> they proudly profess to believe in the absence of any supporting >> evidence, while disallowing such reasoning for bizarre beliefs >> different to their own without any apparent awareness of the >> inconsistency. >> > > Some believers and some religions do, others not.� But this is not limited to > religion.� You saw John Clark admit he was proud to reject ideas (even those > with some evidence), in a effect, making a factual statement (implied idea X > is not true) in the absence of supporting evidence. > > As an example showing that such certainty is a trait of all religion, see > this quote concerning creation from the Rig Veda: > > 揥ho knows truly?� Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this > creation?� The gods are subsequent to the creation of this.� Who, then, knows > whence it has come into being?� Whence this creation has come into being; > whether it was made or not; he in the highest heaven is its surveyor.� Surely > he knows, or perhaps he knows not.� > > Jason > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Re: "Reason is and ever ought to be, the slave of passion."
Hi Craig Weinberg That was a rhetorical statement. Hyperbole. Obviously, as you point out, it didn't happen with the white men killing Indians or the nazis killing Jews. But I think it still had to be overcome in those cases, by orders from above. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/12/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Craig Weinberg Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-11, 12:32:19 Subject: Re: "Reason is and ever ought to be, the slave of passion." On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 9:33:57 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: Hi Jason Resch Faith (trust) and love trump logic every time. If my neighbor has riches, it would be logical to rob him blind. Why 'every time'. Didn't the Native Americans have faith and love in their spiritual traditions yet we exterminated by the tens of millions by the logic of European conquest? Didn't the logic of Auschwitz trump the faith of the Jews in their God, and the love and faith that the Nazis had for Hitler fall under the logic of allied carpet bombing? Craig "Reason is and ever ought to be, the slave of passion." David Hume Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 9/11/2012 Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him so that everything could function." - Receiving the following content - From: Jason Resch Receiver: everything-list Time: 2012-09-11, 08:53:41 Subject: Re: victims of faith On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: But what is unique about religion is that its proponents make factual statements which they proudly profess to believe in the absence of any supporting evidence, while disallowing such reasoning for bizarre beliefs different to their own without any apparent awareness of the inconsistency. Some believers and some religions do, others not. But this is not limited to religion. You saw John Clark admit he was proud to reject ideas (even those with some evidence), in a effect, making a factual statement (implied idea X is not true) in the absence of supporting evidence. As an example showing that such certainty is a trait of all religion, see this quote concerning creation from the Rig Veda: ? ho knows truly? Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this creation? The gods are subsequent to the creation of this. Who, then, knows whence it has come into being? Whence this creation has come into being; whether it was made or not; he in the highest heaven is its surveyor. Surely he knows, or perhaps he knows not. Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/B6f9z9DfSZQJ. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: "Reason is and ever ought to be, the slave of passion."
On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 9:33:57 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: > > Hi Jason Resch > > Faith (trust) and love trump logic every time. > If my neighbor has riches, it would be logical to > rob him blind. > Why 'every time'. Didn't the Native Americans have faith and love in their spiritual traditions yet we exterminated by the tens of millions by the logic of European conquest? Didn't the logic of Auschwitz trump the faith of the Jews in their God, and the love and faith that the Nazis had for Hitler fall under the logic of allied carpet bombing? Craig > > > "Reason is and ever ought to be, the slave of passion." > > David Hume > > > > > Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net > 9/11/2012 > Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him > so that everything could function." > > - Receiving the following content - > *From:* Jason Resch > *Receiver:* everything-list > *Time:* 2012-09-11, 08:53:41 > *Subject:* Re: victims of faith > > > > On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Stathis Papaioannou > > > wrote: > >> But what is unique >> about religion is that its proponents make factual statements which >> they proudly profess to believe in the absence of any supporting >> evidence, while disallowing such reasoning for bizarre beliefs >> different to their own without any apparent awareness of the >> inconsistency. >> >> > Some believers and some religions do, others not.� But this is not limited > to religion.� You saw John Clark admit he was proud to reject ideas (even > those with some evidence), in a effect, making a factual statement (implied > idea X is not true) in the absence of supporting evidence. > > As an example showing that such certainty is a trait of all religion, see > this quote concerning creation from the Rig Veda: > > 锟�ho knows truly?� Who here will declare whence it arose, whence this > creation?� The gods are subsequent to the creation of this.� Who, then, > knows whence it has come into being?� Whence this creation has come into > being; whether it was made or not; he in the highest heaven is its surveyor.� > Surely he knows, or perhaps he knows not.� > > Jason > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com > . > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-li...@googlegroups.com . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/B6f9z9DfSZQJ. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
