the Decline of reason
I'm always wondering how can reasons really work in this world without checking the fundanmental elements, or to say, the basis of your boasted 'everlasting truth'.
I hope it's not a world in decline of rational approach in a way we immerse ourselves in mythology of scientific calculation or evolutionary evaluation or anything that confines one's possible ways of diversified viewing things, whereas happily labeling it as an advance in human intelligence and framwork to understand others and the world.
So, I once met a men who can be listed as a stereotype as to the approach of what I call THE DECLINE OF REASON.
He argues:"Liberty calls for no boundaries"
Why? "Because it's the inborn rights of human being,"
So why the inborn rights?You know for most period of time in the history LIBERTY is nothing but an aristocrat ornament.
"Because every man has to be free of doing what he wants, saying what he wants, or there shall not be advances in social progress."
So why social progress should based on the willingness of every man while their personal persuit may differ from one another,or to say, there might never be a consensus on general advances?And why, the social progress is the inner demand of human being,which is his first argument in defense of his point of LIBERTY.
"Because the majority can always make better decision that the minortity in public affairs, and for the interests of the majority, the minority wil have to either surrender to the majority and become a member of them ,or fight against the majority which obviously results in failure in getting his interests."
So here we see the argument about LIBERTY has totally changed direction. It's not because the misleading of quesitioning but the undefined terms that formed its concept long before the argument out of his view of INTEREST although actually he's by no means experienced the LIVERTY he admires so much, even has no idea of what liberty MEANS. He is just so cared about his own interest and will be never on behalf of the minority who may literally stands for what he calls THE INNER RIGHT OF HUMAN BEING, and Liberty is, unfortunately nothing more than a mere plain hope in search of his dayfream of getting every possible thing on his own interest.If,may I speak frankly,he were born in Germany,being the fanatic supporter of nationalism supported by the Natzi, he would undoubtedly wield his passion in the movement of racial cleasing.To him,whatever liberty is named:facism,aritocrat hiarchy,or communism, there's nothing should be regarded except for his current interest.
There,in this way,flourishes so many biases, and more unfortunately people regard these biases as the expression of comtemplated ration. Some uncouscious biases even skeptically glorish this era a time of biases, being so fond of the sense of being bong together in a group where flows simiar biases.
Is it just a deem desperately asking for self-identity in a world people know anything but respect for difference? Or just an excuse to show that I myself am qualified and obliged to lead the heads of the mass or presumptously consider myself to be the sage of the time?
When Spanish people are scared to admit the huge impact inherited from Muslins in middle ages who almost ruled and dominated the state's economy, politics and even cultural tendancy, they are unconscious about what a big influence that Christian theology has been exerting throughtout the European history: the humiliation of Muslim overlords before the 11th century, the Crusades inspired by the hope of rich land(not holy land) and the fear of hell,e.g..The Europe re-established its confidence by besieging Jerusalem and slaughtering over 20,000 Muslim residents there, while at the same time being ferociously afraid of any possible revenge.Their dominance derives from fear and frustration, although they seem to be the strong.
Maybe it's also suitable for reasoning why the irrational lapse into words such as LOGIC,REASON,RATIONALITY. They're so scared and worried unless their mask of theie wretched interests and frustrational is still not unveiled so that they can keep the sense of superiority as if they were in mastery of reason.
I hope it's not a world in decline of rational approach in a way we immerse ourselves in mythology of scientific calculation or evolutionary evaluation or anything that confines one's possible ways of diversified viewing things, whereas happily labeling it as an advance in human intelligence and framwork to understand others and the world.
So, I once met a men who can be listed as a stereotype as to the approach of what I call THE DECLINE OF REASON.
He argues:"Liberty calls for no boundaries"
Why? "Because it's the inborn rights of human being,"
So why the inborn rights?You know for most period of time in the history LIBERTY is nothing but an aristocrat ornament.
"Because every man has to be free of doing what he wants, saying what he wants, or there shall not be advances in social progress."
So why social progress should based on the willingness of every man while their personal persuit may differ from one another,or to say, there might never be a consensus on general advances?And why, the social progress is the inner demand of human being,which is his first argument in defense of his point of LIBERTY.
"Because the majority can always make better decision that the minortity in public affairs, and for the interests of the majority, the minority wil have to either surrender to the majority and become a member of them ,or fight against the majority which obviously results in failure in getting his interests."
So here we see the argument about LIBERTY has totally changed direction. It's not because the misleading of quesitioning but the undefined terms that formed its concept long before the argument out of his view of INTEREST although actually he's by no means experienced the LIVERTY he admires so much, even has no idea of what liberty MEANS. He is just so cared about his own interest and will be never on behalf of the minority who may literally stands for what he calls THE INNER RIGHT OF HUMAN BEING, and Liberty is, unfortunately nothing more than a mere plain hope in search of his dayfream of getting every possible thing on his own interest.If,may I speak frankly,he were born in Germany,being the fanatic supporter of nationalism supported by the Natzi, he would undoubtedly wield his passion in the movement of racial cleasing.To him,whatever liberty is named:facism,aritocrat hiarchy,or communism, there's nothing should be regarded except for his current interest.
There,in this way,flourishes so many biases, and more unfortunately people regard these biases as the expression of comtemplated ration. Some uncouscious biases even skeptically glorish this era a time of biases, being so fond of the sense of being bong together in a group where flows simiar biases.
Is it just a deem desperately asking for self-identity in a world people know anything but respect for difference? Or just an excuse to show that I myself am qualified and obliged to lead the heads of the mass or presumptously consider myself to be the sage of the time?
When Spanish people are scared to admit the huge impact inherited from Muslins in middle ages who almost ruled and dominated the state's economy, politics and even cultural tendancy, they are unconscious about what a big influence that Christian theology has been exerting throughtout the European history: the humiliation of Muslim overlords before the 11th century, the Crusades inspired by the hope of rich land(not holy land) and the fear of hell,e.g..The Europe re-established its confidence by besieging Jerusalem and slaughtering over 20,000 Muslim residents there, while at the same time being ferociously afraid of any possible revenge.Their dominance derives from fear and frustration, although they seem to be the strong.
Maybe it's also suitable for reasoning why the irrational lapse into words such as LOGIC,REASON,RATIONALITY. They're so scared and worried unless their mask of theie wretched interests and frustrational is still not unveiled so that they can keep the sense of superiority as if they were in mastery of reason.
