Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [existlist] Reason as will

Expand Messages
  • Bobconkawi@aol.com
    I m not sure where the issue started, but will most certainly can provoke reason. In fact, until we discover a passion for understanding we have no reason to
    Message 1 of 6 , Jan 3, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      I'm not sure where the issue started, but will most certainly can provoke reason. In fact, until we discover a passion for understanding we have no reason to begin the painful process of reasoning. Didn't Nietzsche saysomething about will provoking thought? Remember Mersault, in The Stranger? Only when he found a passion for living at the point of death did he start thinking about his life. Wasn't the point that "we must live as if we are going to die in the morning and the sun is beginning to rise" to provoke thought?--Bob

      -----Original Message-----
      From: Exist List Moderator <existlist1@...>
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 18:47:15 -0800
      Subject: Re: [existlist] Reason as will


      On Dec 26, 2005, at 17:38, Renato Cezar wrote:

      > Please, I´m looking for any explanation on how our will can be
      > understood as prior to our reason, or the origin of our reason. It
      > would be like an epistemological explanation of WHY the will is the
      > foundation of reason, or anyway a prerequisite for reason.

      Numerous studies have shown that people reach a conclusion then use
      "reason" to support their choices. We do not comprehend the complete
      neurobiology involved, but the time from action to conscious reason is
      about 300 ms, meaning there is a gap between the action and the
      understanding of the action. That's why we flinch instinctively when
      something is actually on a screen -- our actions occur much faster than
      the mind can reason them away.

      If you want anything, you can develop logic to support the choice. If
      logic were "pure" and truth universal, philosophy would not have
      developed. No political debates would be necessary, either, since the
      "right" choices should always be logically calculated. Machines could
      do a much better job and making choices than people.

      And yet, we like being in charge. We like using "logic" and "reason" to
      support our biases. Just listen to talk radio any day of the week and
      you will hear two sides, seemingly logical, reach different conclusions
      with similar facts at hand. Funny how that works.


      - C. S. Wyatt
      I am what I am at this moment, not what I was and certainly not all
      that I shall be.
      http://www.tameri.com - Tameri Guide for Writers
      http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist - The Existential Primer



      Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

      Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist
      Yahoo! Groups Links






      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.