this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2024
55 points (100.0% liked)
askchapo
22524 readers
56 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try [email protected] if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
-
Posts about mental health should go in [email protected] you are loved here :meow-hug: but !mentalhealth is much better equipped to help you out <3.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Logic, reason, realistic and idealist
Logic and Reason are dogwhistles for "I'm a massive shithead, don't listen to me".
"You're being too emotional/idealistic!" in reference to my beliefs regarding concepts like nature vs nurture, competition vs cooperation etc. Even though me, as an ecology undergrad, just used my scientific knowledge of ecosystems to justify my position.
And funny that this is always said to me by someone who has never studied anything to do with biology. But they have been taught to believe that anything that isn't vicious cruelty and domination is unrealistic and emotional.
There is also something to be said about emotion itself not necessarily being devoid of reason and logic too. But its something people just assume is unreasonable because of how "emotion vs logic" as two opposites is ingrained in our culture.
Sorry, I rambled a bit there.
Ironically "idealism" is almost always an accurate way to describe the chuddier position on an issue.
Yeah, to chuds and libs, idealism is just when you think maybe cruelty is bad
That perfectly captures the mindset of the "facts and logic" crowd. Believing that cruelty is good actually is the mature smart adult in the room position. It doesn't matter whether they've studied anything or not, believing in cruelty makes tgem smart. You could have every credential and relevent degree imaginable, but if your position is anything approaching "maybe cruelty is not good" you're a bleeding heart, emotional, idealist, childish, untealistic, etc.
If I throw something at your head and it hits you in the face, was it because you did something irrational?
No. Maybe the throw was too hard. Maybe you weren't paying attention. Maybe you can't see, or maybe your arms don't work the way other people's do. Maybe you felt something coming and didn't know what to do and panicked. Maybe you like getting hit in the face. Maybe I threw it really softly, and you were paying attention, but you've never practiced or tried to block/dodge a moving object and it hits you on the nose.
None of those situations are irrational. The only thing irrational that could occur is thinking it happened because of something that couldn't be explained, or by maybe trying the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
They haven't ever glanced at formal logic aside from a list of fallacies either. They tske the stsr trek Vulcan approach and just kinda say their moral philosophy is logical without really getting into the fact that there are different schools of logic and they aren't doing any of them aside from vibes
The fascists that say "logic and reason" tend to be the most unreasonable, illogical and emotionally charged shitheads out there.
Anytime people say I'm not logical. I'm emotional