Good evening ladies and gentlemen, welcome to SDA Late Nite Radio. Tonight, for your delectation and pursuant to our Thursday night wild-card show, here is the famous story of Lake Peigneur (9:53): a good reminder to everyone to always be careful where you dig, obviously in the concrete, but also, I would postulate, in the abstract.
Your Reader Tips are, as always, welcome in the comments.
ET: Yes, I agree: “Of course reason is logical! What else can it be?”
But you also stated: “Your definition of reason as only pertaining to logical frameworks is incorrect.”, so I am still puzzled. What is reason apart from these logical constructs? You have suggested “ability to think” — so what’s that? Lots of “thinking” is not logical at all, so I suspect “not reasonable” . . . and ability to “empirically sense data” — I think you need to explain this more concretely or provide an example.
My main point is that reason (as we normally experience it) is tied to some sort of logical construct (sometimes an internal logical construct that makes sense only to ourselves), and that this is not a basis for determining moral behaviour and distinguishing right from wrong.
bluetech @ 2:23 a.m.: “You actually confirm PMSH’s statement WRT big government(welfare state). Is it possible you misunderstood the text?”
I don’t think so. It was the last sentence in which he starts doubting the marketplace that I was addressing. Of course, the free market is not a solution to literally ALL problems in the world (like blizzards or insanity), but it has always performed much better than any economic alternatives, because it is based on man’s nature. If conservatives shouldn’t believe in the welfare state or in the marketplace, then what on earth should they believe in?
Gord Tulk @ 2:25 a.m.: “You believe that I am not going to come over to your house and beat the snot out of you. Faith is everywhere. Rights exist for lots of things : individual property and family they are not designed exclusive from one another and there are times when idiividual rights take secondary status unless you are some kind of aclu freakazoid.”
I believe you’re not coming over because no one has done so for many years, but there’s maybe a one-in-a-million chance things will change today. I would use “trust” [in my fellow man] rather than “faith”.
Individual rights sometimes take secondary status because other individual rights are more important. My right to swing my fist ends at your nose — you know the drill. The key is to find the proper hierarchy of rights (which is what leftists deny even exists, because they want to obliterate rights completely). Yes, there are plenty of limits on rights including free expression; I have never said they were absolute.
Gord Tulk @ 2:25 a.m.: “‘faith’ as harper is using the term provide the ethical basis of right and wrong.”
You have to use your mind to figure out what is right and wrong, just like to figure out everything else in your life. There’s simply no place for “faith”, which is the refusal to use one’s mind.
ural @ 3:08 a.m.: “you twist words good enough to be a CBC reporter”
I’m not aware that I twisted anything.
ET @ 10:09 a.m.: “The state has a role in setting up laws, boundaries, within which the market place operates”
I agree. It has to enforce rules against fraud, for example. That’s one of its proper functions. But it should not run businesses itself, tax, subsidize, or pass millions of nuisance regulations.
ET @ 10:09 a.m.: “no human lives as an isolate being but among a community”
True. That’s why we trade with each other for mutual benefit.
Me No Dhimmi @ 12:21 p.m.: “We need to always remember that the perfect is the enemy of the good.”
Not “the enemy”, but sometimes you have to take what you can get. The jury is apparently still out regarding whether Stephen Harper has copped out completely or is taking what he can get. The audience here is divided, and I have no clue.
LindaL @ 4:43 p.m.: “Faith (or morality) as Harper refers to it draws upon a ‘higher’ truth”
There is no “higher” truth. There is only one existence, namely the one we live in, and any truths we find are found in it. “Higher” truth is an appeal to mysticism, which goes hand in hand with totalitarianism.
LindaL @ 4:43 p.m.: “What does ‘reason’ tell us about the morality of abortion or mercy killing, capital punishment or even gay marriage?”
People can use their minds and still come up with different answers. What could faith possibly tell you about them?
LindaL @ 7:39 p.m.: “I think that our notions of right and wrong depend on some sort of external authority”
What if there isn’t one? You have to prove it exists before you can cite it.
LindaL @ 11:06 p.m.: “We need something bigger than ourselves. . . a great spirit or collective consciousness”
That’s mysticism again. Philosophically, it’s this kind of thinking by people like Hegel and Marx that has got the world into so much trouble.
The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of.
— Blaise Pascal
Heart speaks to heart.
— John Henry Cardinal Newman
Reason and faith live side by side as amicable neighbours, not behind their separate fences as combatants.
— batb
The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of.
— Blaise Pascal
Heart speaks to heart.
— John Henry Cardinal Newman
Reason and faith live side by side as amicable neighbours, not behind their separate fences as combatants.
— batb
testing
The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of.
Blaise Pascal
Heart speaks to heart.
John Henry Cardinal Newman
Reason and faith live side by side as amicable neighbours, not behind their separate fences as combatants.
batb
The Dear Leader states that while conservatives don’t believe big government is the be all and end all solution, nor do they believe the marketplace is. REASON tells us that Mr. Harper’s beliefs lie somewhere in between, as do the beliefs of the Liberals, the Bloc, the Greens, the NDP, and the Flat Earth Society.
Dear Leader further states that his idea of personal liberty lies somewhere between complete individual freedom and total conformity based on a totalitarian moralistic determination of right and wrong, uh, just like everyone else on the planet.
ET has FAITH in the profundity of these empty statements. “Ain’t we lucky” she gushes. Others add their huzzahs and dittos.
A REASONed analysis reveals there is no there there.
Truvius chimes in with his usual pedantic BS.
How tiresome.
linda l – a logical framework such as a syllogism, won’t necessarily lead you to a true conclusion.
But reasoning operates within a multitude of frameworks – such as the syllogism, the If-Then proposition, quantificational logic, etc. And, reason also operates within inductive or observational experience where you examine the truthfulness of observations – i.e., did you really see a pig fly? This observation is referenced to a logical framework, i.e., If Pigs could fly, then, building a fence would be useless but since the fence seems to work, then, pigs cannot fly.
Moral behaviour is a communal rather than strictly individual belief. It is derived from the reasoning of the community, so, if the community thinks that it is moral to be polygamous – and some communities do now, and have done so as indigeneous tribes – then, this is their morality.
The Golden Rule is a basic common and universal rule, which I think stands up anywhere. But societal norms are quite different.
nv53 – I agree with your opposition to mysticism, or essentialism (Hegel and Marx are indeed good examples)but I agree with a communal ‘collective consciousness’, as LindaL suggested. These are the set of beliefs and values which any collective must develop.
Man, and indeed, nothing, lives as isolate units. Even atoms exist both as their individual form and also, within communal patterns of organization (the chemical elements table). So, we must examine how and what – is this communal ‘collective consciousness’ within the human society. Again, I suggest they are developed by and within the collective. Over time and over history. The American Declaration of Independence and Constitution are one such example. The Bible is another example.
These don’t come from some external meta-authority (I’m an atheist) but from within the collective. By the use of reason, emotion – and faith, which simply means trust in the ability to develop such communal guidelines. Faith doesn’t mean a belief in an external metaphysical Authority!
nv53: “You have to use your mind to figure out what is right and wrong.” — not good enough. This just leads to moral relativism.
Re: “That’s mysticism again. Philosophically, it’s this kind of thinking by people like Hegel and Marx that has got the world into so much trouble.” — Yes, but nihilism and reductionist thinking also gets us into trouble — that’s why the world is in so much trouble today. I think that rationalism is a tool and not necessarily the only avenue to understanding truth/reality. I think the real problem is our reptilian brains which (at this point) are incapable of perceiving a bigger picture or the wholistic fabric of life.
Apologies for all of the posts. None of them showed up when I posted them originally. This happens every once in awhile, where I enter a comment and it doesn’t post. Then I close down SDA, go back and, voila, there it is.
‘Tried that above and it didn’t work — and, now, hours later, all of the posts show up.
Oh well. I did want to make my point!!