INTRODUCTION The rationalist view states that the reasoning is the unique factor in humans. They say that we (humans) are thinkers capable of reasoning. The right way to live can be delivered through reasoning. Logic is used by rationalist as the standard principle of knowledge (testing claims of reality, truth, to make judgments and taking conclusions out of them). In order to perceive logic through the process of a rationalist it has to be fallacy proof and should be free from critical thinking. Biasness and emotions have no place in rationalism. People confuse free thinking and rationalism but the literal meaning does not connect them together. Free thinking is a non restrictive definition on the other hand rationalism is a restrictive …show more content…
he cannot just state that ‘’ God doesn’t exist’’. As rationalism demands logic and concept so he can’t even state that ‘’ God is the one moving this whole universe’’. So a rationalist will take the existence of god as logically meaningless and he will take the position of a noncognitivist. The above example does not mean that rationalist cannot have any opinion about anything. An opinion that does not contradict logic observation or evidence does not prevent from forming an indefinite opinion. Reasoning gives us the power to rise above our wants, desires, enabling us to define ourselves. According to Pluto: Reason is the highest part of a human nature. The three defining parts of human nature where reason should dominate which are aggression, reason and appetite. The highest power a human persist is the reasoning. Our propensity to think is the proof of our spiritual nature. When an individual ruminate and reason he is engaged in such activities that our substantial body cannot continue with (evidence of an immaterial soul) . The self is immortal. According to Aristotle: If you want to know the truth about human nature it only involves the understanding of our own world and not an immaterial self. The ability to reason is that attribute of a human which positions him apart from the creatures of the rest of the …show more content…
To full fill the will of god 2. To serve god 3. To love god • To full fill the will of god: In order to fulfill the will of god you have to subsume your personal will to fulfill the will of god. • To serve god : To serve god means to serve humanity. We and god share the same attributes but the control and power in the attributes of god are infinite and ours in finite. As we share the same attributes god has created us to serve our fellow men (humanity). • To love god: To love god doesn’t mean to follow god but to follow the will of god not because of the fear but because of love. Love is always a free choice.
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
The Limits of Reason Over time people have evolved to use reason and logical explanations to solve problems rather than spiritual beliefs. Before humans began relying on rational thought, they based their actions off of the belief of gods and fate. An example of someone relying solely on reason in the age of gods and goddesses is The Fox in Till We Have Faces: A Myth Retold. This character, The Fox, in Till We Have Faces: A Myth Retold by C. S. Lewis relies on reason to solve complicated situations which may limit him mentally from other possible solutions and may also be evident in today’s culture.
Reason is the part that guides the other parts of the soul, it analysis and rationalizes options, and determines the best overall choice. Spirit is the part that is passionate and strives to conquer challenges, while appetite is the part that desires pleasures and comforts. Plato states that all three parts are balanced properly when reason the one in charge, but when poorly balanced, virtue is lost and vices begin to form. Ignorance is a vice. In Philabus, Plato states that when harmony of the soul is disrupted, one becomes self-ignorant, and can acquire a false sense of beauty, wealth, and virtue.
Humans are unlike any other creature on this planet, as we are able to think and reason. These two abilities have created the most powerful minds ever known such as, Albert Einstein, Isaac Newton, and Plato. These abilities have also lead to some powerful arguments one of such being our beliefs. Some philosophers believe that all beliefs must be justified, while others believe that only some of our beliefs must be justified. W.K. Clifford argues that it is morally wrong to act or believe without sufficient evidence.
Unlike human will, human reason is free and has no innate morality. Human reason is persuaded by the external world and is influenced by other people’s thoughts and actions. In other words, the reasoning of one person can rub off onto other people, sending a ripple of ideas out into society. It is the element in which humans control and use to handle their thoughts and actions. Through human reason, people become imperfect and in short, human.
The fact that synthetic a priori knowledge is known by us suggests that important truths can be known by the pure reason. However, rationalist metaphysics was not followed by the author Immanuel Kant in asserting that pure reason has the influence to take hold of the mysteries of the world. Instead, the author suggests that whatever we perceives in mind shapes the reality. As per author the mind do not inactively receive information provided by the senses. Instead, it actively shapes and makes sense of that information.
This statement clearly leads to the discussion on the matter of reasoning. Reasoning is called the process of thinking about things in a logical way (Oxford Advancesd Learner 's Dictionanry, 2005). The procedure of using reason (thinking) in making a judgment or reaching a conclusion, according to a certain metholody. Logic could be defined as the study of the principles of reasoning.
Francis Bacon has articulated this distinction in stating that "empiricists are like ants; they collect and put to use; but rationalists are like spiders; they spin threads out of themselves". Empiricists and rationalists have a different point of view entirely. Empiricists claim that sense experiences are the only source of our knowledge or any knowledge that exists anywhere while the rationalists claim that innate ideas are the only source of knowledge and are constructs of how reason in some form or other provides that additional information about the world which can’t be perceived by the senses. Descartes, Spinoza and Leibniz are while Locke, Berkeley and Hume are the British Empiricists. When we see something like:
As Homo sapiens, we pride ourselves on the fact that we can construct coherent thought and form sound analysis through piecing together clear identifiable building blocks in a process known as reason. It is an instinctual process and we define it as the key feature that separates us from other species. Reason is the method or rather tool used to think in a distinct and organized way in order to achieve knowledge and understanding. Its importance and significance is in its method and the end toward which it is used defines the validity of the method. Reason is the method that allows us to determine how to gather information and what kind of information we need.
Logic is central to any argument or public discourse. Logic is simply the way a person reasons - their method of making an argument. When you understand that most people engage in inductive reasoning (going from a specific argument to a more general one) then you can respond to their “logic” more effectively. Unfortunately, today many arguments are based mainly on faulty reasoning and/or simply an appeal to emotions or biases rather than reason. Just think of any news channel TV anchor personality and you can detect their biases in their choice of words or the way in which they report on an issue.
Rational action is seen in behaviors that are motivated by a analytical or reasoned evaluation of an individual, group, or organizations goals and how they pursue them. Non-rational action is when behavior is motivated by either emotions or traditions instead of thoughtful reasoning. The two articles, “So Eager for Grandchildren, They’re Paying the Egg-Freezing Clinic” and “In Choosing a Sperm Donor, a Roll of the Genetic Dice” there are prime examples of both rational and non-rational action.
He argues that rationality and reasonableness emphaise different aspects of human nature. Rationality emphasizes the passive side of human nature, our capacity to be pleased and satisfied. In the weighting system it is usually the one that has the highest ranking and best utility. On the other hand, reasonableness emphasizes the active side of our human nature; our own capacity for control and constraint. The absolute constraint remains unaffected by individuals’ preferences and tests.
Reason is how we think about something in a logical manner. It is the complete opposite what instinctive judgment is. Our instincts in this context are natural intuitive power. If we can picture coming home late at night, nobody around and arriving at the point where we have to walk down a dark alley in a bad part of town to get home. Also there is one man coming from the other side slowly walking in your direction.