Thread: Religion
View Single Post
Old June 11th, 2014, 03:37 PM  
Gamma Male
Awesome Poster
Gamma Male's Forum Picture
Name: Donald
Join Date: February 9, 2014
Location: The Alpha Quadrant
Age: 18
Gender: Cisgender Male
Blog Entries: 2
Default Re: Religion

Originally Posted by Vlerchan View Post
It's not a logical decision. Handing over money to people I don't know (anonymously) goes against my self-interest: it hurts me to be altruistic.
Going against your self interest is logical if it helps others and reduces the total amount of suffering in the world. It doesn't matter if it's your suffering or not.

I'd accept this if our opinions weren't influenced usually by our emotions. They are though. In my opinion the consequences of binge drinking are outweighed by the benefits. It's also might be my opinion (disclaimer: this time it's not) that the consequences of overdosing on cocaine are outweighed by the benefits. By your logic, which I don't consider logic, this is a perfectly logical formulation because I believe it's a perfectly logical formulation (see: circular reasoning).
Whether or not binge drinking occasionally is logical or not depends on how much you enjoy it. If occasionally binge drinking brings you great joy and positive emotions then I see no reason why it wouldn't be logical to occasionally binge drink because, depending on the person and the situation, the benefits(fun, socialization, etc) might outweigh the consequences.
Furthermore, logic is objective. In this case we might dispute the idea that the consequences of binge drinking are outweighed the benefits: now, if we were deducting this logically we could decide objectively which is better (to binge drink or not to binge drink) but because we're not deducting this logically and are rather going on our emotion-influenced opinions it is thus impossible to reach this objective logical conclusion. tl;dr (because that's explained awfully): If there's room for differing opinions surrounding a conclusion then it's by definition not the logical conclusion, because the logical conclusion would be objectively true.
I agree that for every decision we must make, there is ultimately one choice that is the most logical, but due to emotion and human error that one logical decision is oftentimes impossible to reach or realize.

No. But I'm not disputing this.

I'm disputing the idea that something being illogical is a meaningful criticism.
Something being illogical is a perfectly meaningful criticism. I try to make all of my decisions based off of logic and rationality, and when I don't and I let emotion or irrationallity get in the way I welcome criticism.

Ayn Rand was correct in stating that moving against your own self-interest is illogical.
I disagree. Could you expand on why you think this is true?
She was just incorrect to believe that people were logical beings to begin with.
If by "logical being" you mean someone who makes all of their decisions based on logic, then of course human beings aren't logical beings. But we can still use logic to a certain extant, and in my opinion we should always strive toward making our decisions as logical as possible.

You believe that suffering is bad. Suffering in itself is not inherently bad. It's actually illogical to believe so.
Suffering isn't bas as a whole, because it helps us survive by telling us what's dangerous and what isn't. But the feeling of suffering, the sensation itself, is always bad. If a feeling is negative or bad it's a form of suffering. If a feeling is positive or joyful it isn't a form of sufferingl.[/QUOTE]

~No really, I love capitalistic markets, I just think we should consider letting the workers seize the means of production.~
Gamma Male is offline   Reply With Quote