Deep Thoughts by Patrick Shea: Can one reason beyond reason?
Quote of the Day: "Try no. Do. Or do not. There is no try." - - - Yoda
Have you ever been in a situation where you think you might want to do something but arent sure? You arent sure but you are kinda sure, and the longer you think about it the more you reason yourself out of doing it. This has happened to me lately. With the onset of spring break I have done absolutely nothing thus giving the more time to think about it. To add to it this subject has been brought up and pushed by a certain few people that I know. I am constantly in extreme reasoning beyond reason.
--I am not in the mood to post today. This post is being made only because last night I tried to make it but the blog server was down. I will however turn this into something meaningful, perhaps.--
Can one really reason beyond reason? Can we out think ourselves? Obviously we can out think ourselves and sike ourselves out, however is that now reason beyond reason? Furthermore, What is reason beyond reason? I would say it is either:
1. When one uses reason to achieve the answer he or she may subconciously want, but is not with true reason. It is driven by desire and has clouded their mind.
2. When one uses reason to achieve the answer that is fueled by uncertainty and doubts, fear, guilt or whatever else that has a negative effect on some of our decisions. This is in a way the same and opposite of point number 1. You have a desire but reason yourself out of that desire giving yourself the opposite result. Again, not true reason.
It is "out-reasoning" ourselves. We will look into something so deeply that we may miss the point or end up with an answer we should never have ended up with; or the right answer with the wrong reasoning, which would be comparable to a concurring opinion on the supreme court where they agree with the majority opinion but have a different constitutional reasoning.
This brings me to another question. Can i really call it reasoning beyond reason, if in fact i have referred to it as not true reason? I suppose i can and i cant. I think that when one reasons beyond reason, he or she will make assumptions, which could be true or not true, but are by no means obtainable or possibly known at that point in time. This would cause it to not be true reason, or faulty reasoning. However you sometimes have to make assumptions in order to reach your answer, but i find that making the exact opposite assumption i have made causes my end result to be its inverse. Furthermore, my assumption is not made with deductive reasoning or likelyhood but based on point # 2 of reason beyond reason. Assumptions have to be made sometimes and people make those assumptions based on the process of elimination or deduction which can result in the likleyhood. This is however not the case in reasoning beyond reason. The assumption is not able to be known at the time of reasoning.
What is one to do them? I have come to the conclusion through my reasoning and find that i do not want to see that the opposite assumption i have made could be true. I do think that my assumption is more likely, but can not ignore the possibility that i am wrong. Internal conflict is the result. Perhaps that could be the subject of another post.
This is all i have to say for now. I have given you enough to think about today, if this is in fact something to actually think about
Until Next Time
Quote the Shea, NeVeRmOrE
Have you ever been in a situation where you think you might want to do something but arent sure? You arent sure but you are kinda sure, and the longer you think about it the more you reason yourself out of doing it. This has happened to me lately. With the onset of spring break I have done absolutely nothing thus giving the more time to think about it. To add to it this subject has been brought up and pushed by a certain few people that I know. I am constantly in extreme reasoning beyond reason.
--I am not in the mood to post today. This post is being made only because last night I tried to make it but the blog server was down. I will however turn this into something meaningful, perhaps.--
Can one really reason beyond reason? Can we out think ourselves? Obviously we can out think ourselves and sike ourselves out, however is that now reason beyond reason? Furthermore, What is reason beyond reason? I would say it is either:
1. When one uses reason to achieve the answer he or she may subconciously want, but is not with true reason. It is driven by desire and has clouded their mind.
2. When one uses reason to achieve the answer that is fueled by uncertainty and doubts, fear, guilt or whatever else that has a negative effect on some of our decisions. This is in a way the same and opposite of point number 1. You have a desire but reason yourself out of that desire giving yourself the opposite result. Again, not true reason.
It is "out-reasoning" ourselves. We will look into something so deeply that we may miss the point or end up with an answer we should never have ended up with; or the right answer with the wrong reasoning, which would be comparable to a concurring opinion on the supreme court where they agree with the majority opinion but have a different constitutional reasoning.
This brings me to another question. Can i really call it reasoning beyond reason, if in fact i have referred to it as not true reason? I suppose i can and i cant. I think that when one reasons beyond reason, he or she will make assumptions, which could be true or not true, but are by no means obtainable or possibly known at that point in time. This would cause it to not be true reason, or faulty reasoning. However you sometimes have to make assumptions in order to reach your answer, but i find that making the exact opposite assumption i have made causes my end result to be its inverse. Furthermore, my assumption is not made with deductive reasoning or likelyhood but based on point # 2 of reason beyond reason. Assumptions have to be made sometimes and people make those assumptions based on the process of elimination or deduction which can result in the likleyhood. This is however not the case in reasoning beyond reason. The assumption is not able to be known at the time of reasoning.
What is one to do them? I have come to the conclusion through my reasoning and find that i do not want to see that the opposite assumption i have made could be true. I do think that my assumption is more likely, but can not ignore the possibility that i am wrong. Internal conflict is the result. Perhaps that could be the subject of another post.
This is all i have to say for now. I have given you enough to think about today, if this is in fact something to actually think about
Until Next Time
Quote the Shea, NeVeRmOrE
posted by P. D. Shea at 4:21 PM
1 Comments:
I agree. I think internal conflict is inevitable when reasoning through a particularly important decision. One thing I have found helpful is talking these things through with friends and mentors who you trust and respect.
Post a Comment
<< Home