Real and false reason - Integral Post-Metaphysical Spirituality2024-03-28T13:47:02Zhttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/real-and-false-reason?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A63394&feed=yes&xn_auth=noAnd of course this Lakoff art…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-09-18:5301756:Comment:770112019-09-18T14:23:37.856ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>And of course <a href="http://legacy.buzzflash.com/commentary/george-lakoff-why-rational-reason-doesnt-work-in-contemporary-politics" rel="noopener" target="_blank">this</a> Lakoff article on the distinction:</p>
<p><strong>"Real reason</strong> is embodied in two ways. It is physical, in our brain circuitry. And it is based on our bodies as the function in the everyday world, using thought that arises from embodied metaphors. And it is mostly unconscious. <strong>False reason</strong> sees…</p>
<p>And of course <a href="http://legacy.buzzflash.com/commentary/george-lakoff-why-rational-reason-doesnt-work-in-contemporary-politics" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this</a> Lakoff article on the distinction:</p>
<p><strong>"Real reason</strong> is embodied in two ways. It is physical, in our brain circuitry. And it is based on our bodies as the function in the everyday world, using thought that arises from embodied metaphors. And it is mostly unconscious. <strong>False reason</strong> sees reason as fully conscious, as literal, disembodied, yet somehow fitting the world directly, and working not via frame-based, metaphorical, narrative and emotional logic, but via the logic of logicians alone. Empathy is physical, arising from mirror neurons systems tied to emotional circuitry. Self-interest is real as well, and both play their roles in real reason. False reason is supposed to serve material self-interest alone."</p>
<p>"Real reason is inexplicably tied up with emotion; you cannot be rational without being emotional. False reason thinks that emotion is the enemy of reason, that it is unscrupulous to call on emotion. Yet people with brain damage who cannot feel emotion cannot make rational decisions because they do not know what to want, since like and not like mean nothing. 'Rational' decisions are based on a long history of emotional responses by oneself and others. Real reason requires emotion."</p>
<p>"It is a basic principle of false reason that every human being has the same reason governed by logic — and that if you just tell people the truth, they will reason to the right conclusion. [...] But many liberals, assuming a false view of reason, think that such a messaging system for ideas they believe in would be illegitimate — doing the things that the conservatives do that they consider underhanded. Appealing honestly to the way people really think is seen as emotional and hence irrational and immoral. Liberals, clinging to false reason, simply resist paying attention to real reason."</p>
<p></p> This post also highlights the…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-09-18:5301756:Comment:772152019-09-18T14:15:32.517ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p><a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/do-our-models-get-in-the-way?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A77137" target="_blank" rel="noopener">This</a> post also highlights the difference between real and false reason.</p>
<p><a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/do-our-models-get-in-the-way?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A77137" target="_blank" rel="noopener">This</a> post also highlights the difference between real and false reason.</p> Check out this thread, of rel…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-09-05:5301756:Comment:772142019-09-05T02:41:32.752ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Check out <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/the-root-of-power-law-religion" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this</a> thread, of relevance to this one.</p>
<p>Check out <a href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/the-root-of-power-law-religion" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this</a> thread, of relevance to this one.</p> Not sure if I posted this by…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-06-23:5301756:Comment:769472019-06-23T16:05:23.851ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>Not sure if I posted <a href="https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fcaa/643bdee3f44043d8f6609f906038bfdc82a6.pdf" rel="noopener" target="_blank">this</a> by Cilliars before but it is of direct relevance to this thread:…</p>
<p></p>
<p>Not sure if I posted <a href="https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fcaa/643bdee3f44043d8f6609f906038bfdc82a6.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this</a> by Cilliars before but it is of direct relevance to this thread:</p>
<p><span style="display: inline !important; float: none; background-color: #ffffff; color: #4e4e54; font-family: inherit; font-size: 1em; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">"In the first place it must be underscored that systems cannot do without hierarchies. [...] Problems arise, however, when these hierarchies are seen as either too clearly defined, or too permanent. The classical understanding of hierarchies tends to view them as being nested. In reality however, hierarchies are not that well-structured. They interpenetrate each other, i.e. there are relationships which cut across different hierarchies. These interpenetrations may be fairly limited, or so extensive that it becomes difficult to typify the hierarchy accurately in terms of prime and subordinate parts" (7). </span></p> Article by Kohler, A.(2018).…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-05-02:5301756:Comment:767012019-05-02T22:07:18.421ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42087-018-0007-9?fbclid=IwAR2kk9zv4CLrGvpo7amB5AbXfcM_AJY5vThOEE6dtOwp9KI1DvtperDITio" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Article</a> by Kohler, A.(2018). Human Arenas, 1(1), pp. 97-111. Some interesting Piaget quotes follow, observations I've repeatedly made in this forum over the years:…</p>
<p><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42087-018-0007-9?fbclid=IwAR2kk9zv4CLrGvpo7amB5AbXfcM_AJY5vThOEE6dtOwp9KI1DvtperDITio" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Article</a> by Kohler, A.(2018). Human Arenas, 1(1), pp. 97-111. Some interesting Piaget quotes follow, observations I've repeatedly made in this forum over the years:</p>
<div class="post-body entry-content" id="post-body-4832388143686881342" style="color: #000000; font-family: Arial,Tahoma,Helvetica,FreeSans,sans-serif; font-size: 110%; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: 1.4; orphans: 2; xg-p: relative; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; width: 100%; word-spacing: 0px;"><span style="color: #1d2129; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span><span class="UFICommentBody">"Finally, it is not impossible that the class is not more a ultimate psychological reality than the set theory is the last word about mathematics foundations."<br/><br/>"We have <span style="font-size: 10pt;">been</span> attempting to point out areas in which psychological experimentation is indispensable to shed light on certain epistemological problems, but even on its own grounds there are a number of reasons why formalization can never be sufficient by itself. I should like to discuss three of these reasons.<br/><br/>"The first reason is that there are many different logics, and not just a single logic. This means that no single logic is strong enough to support the total construction of human knowledge.<br/><br/>"The second reason is found in Gödel’s theorem. It is the fact that there are limits to formalization. Any consistent system sufficiently rich to contain elementary arithmetic cannot prove its own consistency. <br/><br/>"The third reason why formalization is not enough is that epistemology sets out to explain knowledge as it actually is within the areas of science, and this knowledge is, in fact not purely formal: there are other aspects to it."</span></span></span></span></div> How brains think: real v. fal…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-04-05:5301756:Comment:764042019-04-05T15:26:46.464ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>How brains think: real v. false reason.</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ldDAfoVdYU8?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
<p>How brains think: real v. false reason.</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ldDAfoVdYU8?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p> And different models are requ…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-04-03:5301756:Comment:765062019-04-03T15:24:36.799ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>And different models are required to describe more accurately this diversity instead of one universal model for them all.</p>
<p>And different models are required to describe more accurately this diversity instead of one universal model for them all.</p> All of this is not to deny th…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-04-03:5301756:Comment:762042019-04-03T14:54:42.308ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p>All of this is not to deny that the MHC is useful. All math is useful depending on the context in which it is used. Where the MHC is wrong is that it assumes its premises are ontological and thereby makes claims to reality as such. All of the above points to a multiplicity of useful and consistent maths and metaphors, often contradictory, where none of them owns the exclusive claim to reality as such. Which is, btw, a more accurate tenet of postmetaphysics.</p>
<p>All of this is not to deny that the MHC is useful. All math is useful depending on the context in which it is used. Where the MHC is wrong is that it assumes its premises are ontological and thereby makes claims to reality as such. All of the above points to a multiplicity of useful and consistent maths and metaphors, often contradictory, where none of them owns the exclusive claim to reality as such. Which is, btw, a more accurate tenet of postmetaphysics.</p> "It's not objectively out th…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-04-03:5301756:Comment:763052019-04-03T14:48:54.288ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p></p>
<p><span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><a class="UFICommentActorName" style="color: #365899; cursor: pointer; font-family: inherit; font-weight: 600; text-decoration: none; white-space: normal;" dir="ltr" href="https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002642203712&fref=gc&dti=470435939720069" target="_self" rel="dialog"></a></span> <span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span class="UFICommentBody" style="font-family: inherit;">"It's not objectively out there in the world." And two versions of set theories can come up with opposite results. Why? Watch the video. The cognitive and neural foundations of math: <a style="color: #365899; cursor: pointer; font-family: inherit; text-decoration: none;" dir="ltr" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-TZBvjc3s8&fbclid=IwAR2qfcFHxvzaQZjbQ1JvIpLDyK0xZf4Kpcn3ZSSwjA6zqLrfNo7glbaqhU8" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener"></a></span></span></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/S-TZBvjc3s8?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</span></p> Pace layering: How complex sy…tag:integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com,2019-03-24:5301756:Comment:761012019-03-24T20:03:55.163ZEdward theurj Bergehttp://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/profile/theurj
<p><a href="https://jods.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/issue3-brand?fbclid=IwAR1EHJavhkUJIe-6m3NxA-p0UdKslTu-E_CjfYoxeHqGB-ntlsWxQs663Cc" rel="noopener" target="_blank">Pace layering</a>: How complex systems learn and keep learning.…</p>
<p><a href="https://jods.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/issue3-brand?fbclid=IwAR1EHJavhkUJIe-6m3NxA-p0UdKslTu-E_CjfYoxeHqGB-ntlsWxQs663Cc" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Pace layering</a>: How complex systems learn and keep learning. <span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: Arial,Tahoma,Helvetica,FreeSans,sans-serif; font-size: 13.2px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><span class="UFICommentBody">I appreciate this different take on hierarchy, as<br/><br/>"the relationship between components in a system that have different change-rates and different scales of size. […] Consider the differently paced components to be layers. Each layer is functionally different from the others and operates somewhat independently, but each layer influences and responds to the layers closest to it in a way that makes the whole system resilient." <br/><br/>This is much more like the dynamic systems and autopoietic approaches that operate via structural coupling versus the hierarchical complexity approach, where the latter sees each layer being subsumed into the higher via the same scale-free, fractal dynamic. <span style="background-color: #eff1f3; color: #1d2129; display: inline; float: none; font-size: 13px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: left; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;"><span style="background-color: white; color: black; font-size: small;">I call the former approaches <a style="color: #2a669d; text-decoration: none;" href="http://integralpostmetaphysics.ning.com/forum/topics/a-note-on-neologisms?commentId=5301756%3AComment%3A67010">hier(an)archical synplexity</a> to differentiate them.</span></span></span></span></p>