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

Re: [existlist] to clear up the confusion

Expand Messages
  • Bobconkawi@aol.com
    I have not kept up with the debate of feeling vs. reason, so I may be off base, but the notion of the separation of thought and reason is contrary to the very
    Message 1 of 2 , May 29, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      I have not kept up with the debate of feeling vs. reason, so I may be off base, but the notion of the separation of thought and reason is contrary to the very basis of Western philosophy. Consider, Aristotle said all great ideas are a result of problem solving because we don' bother to think unless we have to, since it is so hard. Problems are a result of feelings in conflict with conditions. Hence, all great thought started as a feeling. Only feelings can tell us where we want to go. Only thought can tell us how to get there. If our ancestors had not feared the saber toothed tiger, would they have developed ways to avoid him and had they not would we even be here? Had not Einstein not been frustrated by his efforts to resolve his math problems would he ever have "felt" or intuited his solutions? Carl Jung might have said feelings are just thoughts from the collective unconscious. I believe Sartre him self said we cannot find meaning through thought but only through feeling. ---Bob

      -----Original Message-----
      From: two_owl_night <two_owl_night@...>
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Mon, 29 May 2006 15:28:53 -0000
      Subject: [existlist] to clear up the confusion


      Reason and feeling are functions of the brain. And if you are able to
      so neatly tease them apart from one another, you are far more gifted
      than most. Do feelings influence and shape thought or is it vice-versa?
      Like I've said before, reason is an evolved survival skill. Even if
      this skill was implemented species wide, there will always be some who
      rationally disagrees with another's reasonability. From an existential
      point of view, this idea is relevant and relatively subjective. If one
      is so inclined they can only know how to achieve a balance for
      themselves. So unless you're able to tinker and adjust the genetic
      differences in thers, your moralizing is absolutely ridiculous. Mary






      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.