3 ms·
No, logic is not subordinate to anything. That's you putting numbers on stuff again. I think you try to draw the term "fuzzy" into a negative light here becaus
by michaelgrafl 14y ago
No, logic is not subordinate to anything. That's you putting numbers on stuff again.
I think you try to draw the term "fuzzy" into a negative light here because you have trouble dealing with ambivalence. Then you go absurd and use things like Crusades! and Holocaust! which I clearly wasn't talking about (because blind faith has as little to do with reason as applying quantitative analysis to every question in the universe, and I was following up those terms with what my actual, concrete conviction is made up of) in order to discredit my whole point without trying to understand where I'm coming from.
You're wondering why I find the things you've written disturbing. It's because you put a price on human beings in reply to an article that's about altruism. I'm convinced (WATCH OUT, FUZZINESS AHEAD!!!) by my feelings of compassion that helping people in need does not need a reason beyond It's The Right Thing To Do. I trust my instincts on that one, and I think any attempt to make an altruistic act appear logical is ugly and coarse. And take note that I don't equate “logical” with “reasonable”. Especially not in a case like this.
Again, your trying to put the practices of fear mongering institutions like the various churches and the Nazis in the same category as basic altruism based on the fact that all of these somehow involve belief and conviction (which can be logical, depending on the quality of abstraction you apply) is lazy and disingenuous.
My replies to you probably convey a more hostile tone than I feel comfortable with, and it's kind of random that I'm writing all of this to you, who I only have a vague idea about, in effect addressing many of those I put in the same category as you right now. I would rather discuss something like that in person to take the edge off of it. But I can't shake the feeling (and my impression might very well be wrong) that you've developed some kind of arrogance because you've detected at an early age that you're very intelligent, and how pleasing it is to figure out an axiomatic system and use this enlightenment to your advantage.
That has its place. But that place is not when dealing with the welfare of humanity. I do not object your conclusions. I object the path that led you to them.