| sapphi_snake said: @pizzahut451: Rationality is good because it implies the best possible solution. Yes, Jews are over populating germany and are getting richer and richer. In order to save german ayran race, we need to get rid of jews- this was considerd rational by over 50 million people back than., because they thought what they did was right. What he thought is irrelevant. He wasn't rational, because his resoning started off of irrational premises, thus making all of his views irrational. Morals are subjective because they are not founded on rationality. If morals would be founded on rationality though, then they'd be objective, however lots of subjective elemets contribute to the formation of morals (context etc.). To him, and his millions of followers he was a genius leader and saviour, wayyy far from irrational person. Who are you to say that his premises were irrational? There were at least 80 million people that disagreed with you. And now big majority of them agrees with you. Just like you said can happen with morals, rationality can also be chnaged or proven unrational trough history, acts and persons.in my opinnion, i beleive both rationality and morals are objective and absolute sowhat Hitler did was both irrational and un moral. But, if we wanna go by your beleifs, if morals are subjective, than so is rationality. Every person has diffrent view of rationality and logical thinking.
You don't really undestand what rationality is, no? It's a certain type of thinking. What you're saying is that 2 2 can equal 4 in one situation, and 5 in another, because people want it to be that way, or they "think" it can be that way. Rational thinking is a method of analysing information, not a set of beliefs. There are strict rules to thinking rationally, they're not governed by impressions. Rationality is a certain type of CORRECT thinking, in other words, what a person thinks its the best view/way/solution on the matter. There are diffrent types of rationality as the German sociologist Max Weber suggested. Value/ beleif oriented rationality is one of them...Your comprassion with mathematics is useless, because maths are absolute, because of mathematical laws like II II = IIII. it cant be considerd diffrently, because thats just the way it is. There is only one answer to a problem that is 2 plus 2 and that is four. Those are mathematical laws, not a theory. A problem of Jews Germans had with them inWW2 could have been solved in numorous diffent ways ways, using diffrent logic on thinking but the people that that the genocide was a correct and thus rational. Every person has diffrent definition of ''rational'' on diffrent subject. There is a certian way of thinking in rationality but it sure as hell not the same to every person in the world so it can not possibly be absolute. There's only one definition of rational, but thinking rational reffers to a process, to a way of thinking. The reason why people may appear to think rationally, yet reach different results is that one (or both) commited logical errors (a very common one is starting off of false premises, something which religious people are guilty of, as well as people who are paranoic). So what makes one thought rational? What kind of law besides the moral law (which you reject, and there is a contradiction) can decide what is rational and what not?
But ationality is objective, wheras morals aren't. Oh, but they are, just like rationality. There are no errors in rational thinking You've obviously never heard of sophisms. I should seriosuy end this conversation now, and reccomend you just read some philosophy books. Ok, Ill ask you, what exactly determans the correct rationality? Because logical thinking diffrents from person to person just like there are no errors in morals The main error a moral can have is not being founded in logic. That only applies if you think morlas are man made, not God given, which isnt what our discussion is about. As I said, Hitler was not rational. He broke several rules of logic when he elaborated his ideeas. Of course you wouldn't know anything about logic, would you? Just look at your whole post. You don't see the difference between rationality and morals. He didnt broke his rules of logic. You cant force law into stuff like rationality and logic and put it aside when it comes to morals.Morality refers directly to what is right and wrong, regardless of what specific individuals think. It could be defined as the conduct of the ideal "moral" person in a certain situation.
As for religion being a false superstition, you have absolutely zero evidance to make that statent, so I will just ignore it. I don't see the need to disprove unfounded assumptions. Fine, but you also cant call it false because its both insulting and not proven and as such, not credible. |
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
