The brain is very fond of estimating probabilities when it comes to understanding the future though. It is in no sense a potential roadblock, after all we react to the present a lot more anyways, meaning thinking too much about the future doesn’t make much sense.

It does not mean we can’t deal with those unknowns at all though and we definitely can think rationally about the probabilities and opportunities involved. Even if probably only marginally useful, it doesn’t change the way we process the information or knowledge. It’s like predicting the weather, I am sure you can see the sense in that and the rationality involved, even though it’s not necessarily right.

Also, even though a whole different discussion, 2+2=4 isn’t really “known” data. If you dig deep enough into the core of math, you’ll see it’s nothing more but a simple choice. It actually doesn’t really make that much sense when you think about it, only because we decided to make it a rule it make sense, only because of it’s practical implication and use it makes sense. I’m sure you’re aware of this though.

I don’t think you can really bypass that function though. When it comes to reason, logic is the main weapon of choice. Getting all emotional won’t solve an issue or make you come to an understanding. You can’t randomly assume something is correct either, that would be stupid.

In the end it all has to ‘make sense’ on some level or another. The brain is very much a tool when it comes to processing information. The actual process of ‘thinking’ really isn’t all that logical, nor absolute in thinking correctly, but trust me when I say the brain rather likes to think something makes sense than getting stuck before reaching or getting near that conclusion.

In worst case scenarios, the brain will just pretend to be right / correct. I agree THAT doesn’t necessarily makes sense, but when it comes to rules, laws, equations and problems, the very first thing the brain will try, is deal with it with logic.

Whether a person succeeds coming to an understanding depends on a lot of things, not the least his or her intelligence or experience with reasoning. I very much doubt the brain is able to come up with anything useful without depending on some form of logic… of which there are many.

Careful, most politicians debate using rhetoric and emotional appeal, not rational thought. Aristotle exposed this hundreds of years ago.

“To see how this works look at this perfect example. I ask you the question “Have you stopped beating your wife?”. Try answering this question directly, yes or no, in front of the court without going to jail for the answer you provide!”

You contradict yourself, thats not a perfect example. Your using a logical fallacy to demonstrate that rational thought is erroneous. Thats actually a very good example of bad reasoning, or fallacious logic, and how you subsequently take it apart is an example of good reasoning, or rational thought.

Have you stopped beating your wife? is an example of a petitio principii argument, or “begging the question” fallacy, since the conclusion is asserted in the premise. It could also be considered a “False Dilemma” fallacy, as it is offering the two negative solutions as the only solutions possible.

So how do you get out of this situation without getting your ass busted?

You do exactly what you just did above, and use *rational thought* to expose the errors in the argument.

You simply stop thinking and say whatever you feel like.

I hope you do not. You seem to be a great rational thinker, and the erosion of rational thought and critical thinking in society really enables people who make use of rhetoric, propaganda and emotional appeal.
Consider rational thought and argumentative logic as “intellectual self-defense”. Its the basis of a healthy society. Unfortunately critical thought is not very popular among the masses, and society is rampant with propaganda, poor logic and disinformation. Network news headlines are taken at face value.
Consider GW Bush when he says “your either with us, or against us”. A classic example of a false dilemma, just horrible fallacious logic. Its also loaded with emotional appeal, implying it would be unpatriotic for an American to prefer a more moderate stance.
But its not just in politics. You can find many examples of bad logic by just watching a couple commercials on tv.

Critical thought needs to be encouraged if anything. A lot. Not discouraged.
And if rational thought is discouraging you, its most likely only because you are discouraged by the tremendous amount of bad logic flying around our society, as you have written above.

You can never get rid of logical thinking. One who is devoid of logical thinking is driven solely by instinct, impulse, thought and need of the moment. Such a person has no long-term plans, goals and can not endure minor pain today in order to be able to affrod luxury tomorrow. A person devoid of logic is a shallow, pointless and animalistic existence with no purpose than to eat, shit and fuck.

On the other hand, you’re not really taling about logic here. You’re talking about rules. Again, disobey the rules, kill people, rape ladies and mug businessmen on the streets according to whatever whim you may have at the moment and you won’t have a very happy life. You can’t avoid rules.

You can choose something else however. You ave a choice of whether you use the rules or the rules use you. You can be their creator, their slave or their friend who cleverly spints across moral, ethical, regulatory laws and arrives at success.

I won’t post on this matter anymore as it seems it doesn’t take us anywhere. I am not defending rationality here, I am against rationality myself but because of other reasons and don’t propagade following the heart as it just isn’t THE answer to everything. I hope you will see this someday too. Following the heart will put you in a situation where you will be regarded as being selfish as well as overly possesive in the long run. There is nothing “good” about the heart, so there is no point in these “rationality vs heart” posts, as this is a utilitaristic way of trying to persuade people.

Just as I said: A bad workman blames his tools.
There is nothing wrong with rationality per se, but with the way one might use it.

//Yes, but where do those priorities and beliefs come from?
//All of them were transfered to you by other people, because of raising and education. As I said, if they were //invented by other people they probably do not serve YOU.

Life’s too short to make all the mistakes necessary to learn how to live, so we need to be taught them all instead.

But just following the heart and dismissing everything else is just utter bullshit, sorry to say that.

Look, we can discuss this all day, but why do you claim this. Have you ever done something from your heart and failed? Like you really regret it now? From my experience even if I get hurt at the beginning in the long run I see that it was a perfect way to do things. I’m not claiming that you won’t ever fail if you follow your heart, but I do claim that in the bigger perspective it will be good even if you have no idea why.

Shuger Says:
I choose the reasons i follow myself. Decisions based on them are a reflection of my current priorites/believes.

Yes, but where do those priorities and beliefs come from?
All of them were transfered to you by other people, because of raising and education. As I said, if they were invented by other people they probably do not serve YOU.

The dog knows it because it experienced it before, not becaouse it came to such conclusion.

What is the difference? The difference between experience and thought… heh don’t answer that, it’s a topic for 2 books at least :).

autonomous:
What kind of Dogs do you have? I love my 2 Beagles =D

They are dogs of no kind :). They are called Muppet and Ira.