Is anything ever rational?
- Mike-the-philosopher
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 2
- Joined: October 10th, 2017, 1:48 pm
Re: Is anything ever rational?
I do concur with the position that rationality has to be determined within context of what could have been known for a decision to be called a rational one. It is relative and it has to be restricted in this regard. if there was no way of knowing about the second child, then the decision that is made is made within the limits if this knowledge and then you would hence make decision based on what is known. But then again, is it at all rational for us to define rationality within this context. That is another topic for discussion.
-
- Posts: 392
- Joined: September 29th, 2017, 4:59 pm
Re: Is anything ever rational?
-
- Posts: 460
- Joined: September 12th, 2017, 6:03 pm
Re: Is anything ever rational?
Written 7:43 October 10
-
- Posts: 392
- Joined: September 29th, 2017, 4:59 pm
Re: Is anything ever rational?
-
- Posts: 5161
- Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various
Re: Is anything ever rational?
As usual, we need a definition for 'rationality', a typical one from Wiki;Maxcady10001 wrote:In response to Spectrum, the best use of logic and reason is to have behaved perfectly rational. Any definition of rationality involves the perfect utilization of all available information, the best possible and perfect mean the exact same thing.
Note the above is applied to the doctor example below and is applicable to all other framework and system.Wiki wrote:Rationality is the quality or state of being rational: based on or agreeable to reason [& sound logic]. Rationality implies the conformity of one's beliefs with one's reasons to believe, or of one's actions with one's reasons for action. "Rationality" has different specialized meanings in philosophy, economics, sociology, psychology, evolutionary biology, game theory and political science.
To determine what behavior is the most rational, one needs to make several key assumptions, and also needs a quantifiable formulation[dubious – discuss] of the problem. When the goal or problem involves making a decision, rationality factors in how much information is available (e.g. complete or incomplete knowledge).
Collectively, the formulation and background assumptions are the model within which rationality applies. Illustrating the relativity of rationality: if one accepts a model in which benefiting oneself is optimal, then rationality is equated with behavior that is self-interested to the point of being selfish; whereas if one accepts a model in which benefiting the group is optimal, then purely selfish behavior is deemed irrational.
It is thus meaningless to assert rationality without also specifying the background model assumptions describing how the problem is framed and formulated.
It is not a 'legal' standard, rather it is the professional standard by the AMA that all American doctors abide as members.Your example of the doctor, has the doctor abiding by the legal standards necessary to practice as a doctor, but that does not make his actions objectively rational, were you to ask the doctor what he should have done, he could list a million things that were possible actions at the time that would have prevented the death of the patient, actions the doctor knew at the time could have been undertaken, but he believed he knew the possible consequences of those actions and that they were not the best course of action.
What is rational [in degrees] is conformance to a Framework and System that is agreed by consensus. In the case of the judiciary, it is consensus based on democratic principles.Abiding by the law does not equal rational behavior, as rational behavior is the best possible use of all information. An example can be any jury, judge, or lawyer, was their behavior the result of the best possible use of all information, maybe, but whatever done there is legal.
Firstly there is no ontological objectivity, i.e. objectivity that is totally and absolutely independent of human elements.Could you elaborate on objectivity being inter-subjectivity? And what do you think about the statement, if objectively no one can be rational, objectively everyone is rational. I have no idea when you will read this.
Theists claim such ontological objectivity exists as 'established' by a God but this is a philosophical impossibility.
So the only realistic objectivity [independent of individual opinions] is one that is 'established' by humans' consensus explicitly or implicitly within a framework & system.
Such a shared-objectivity is a consensus by inter-subjects, thus objectivity is at best intersubjectivity.
One good example is scientific objectivity where scientific theories are independent of any individual views but rather are based on the consensus of scientists within the scientific framework and system as in conformance with the following [fm above];
"It is thus meaningless to assert rationality without also specifying the background model assumptions describing how the problem is framed and formulated"
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Is anything ever rational?
You have, and you've done so again above!?In response to Burning Ghost, I have not answered my question, as I just imagined a scenario where killing everyone you meet could be the most rational way to behave, but it is impossible for me to know the most rational way to behave because I cannot behave objectively rational. It may be more rational to hide, or take your own life in that apocalyptic situation.
You are falsely defining "rationality" as if it is gravity. I don't say it is rational for the ball to roll down a slope to a resting potential, yet you are making such an equivalent argument regarding rationality. If I knew ALL the factors and variables there would be no need for rationality, everything would be as it is end of story.
We can create sets of rules where rationality applies quite blatantly. 1+1=2 in basic arithmetic. This is not a "rational" choice, but simply a set system of rules that dictates a certain truth. Human life requires rationality in order to best navigate through a sea of possibilities and requires constant adjustment. If I KNEW I wouldn't be rational, because I would never need to question the outcome of anything (ie. dogmatic thought.)
So, yes, you've answered your question already. You imagine a scenario and imagine a situation where it would be rational to act in such and such a manner. The problem is when the time comes you may not be capable of acting in such a manner and that is why we have to adjust our views to accommodate what we wish to be/do, with what we are capable of doing/being. This is why morality and rationality are inseparable.
-
- Posts: 460
- Joined: September 12th, 2017, 6:03 pm
Re: Is anything ever rational?
1. Rationality is based on or in accordance with logic or reason
2. Rational behavior, is behavior using logic or reason
3. Logic and reason are used in accordance with information
4. Information is facts provided or learned about something or someone
5. Information is always incomplete (as far as we know it)
6. Information is not evenly distributed
7. Logic and reason vary because of information distribution
8. Logic and reason are limited to information
9. Rational behavior cannot be realized due to limitations in logic and reason
Also, with your introduction of inter-subjectivity to objectivity, i don't even think this matters as anything can be objective based on consensus. You could easily only include yourself in the necessary consensus and conclude that whatever you wish to be objectively rational is rational. A clause like that makes any discussion pointless, because anyone could reject what anyone else considers a fact or objective (i'm absolutely not saying that rationality not being objective is a fact, it is only the way i'm able to see it).
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Is anything ever rational?
As for abstract items, this works in an absolute sense. 1+1=2 is not up for discussion or open to varying degrees of opinion.
Reason requires emotion. There is no such thing as reason without emotional attachment for any human being. We unshakable models that we refine further to fit into phenomena that contradicts our models.
I think the issue is your personal take on the term "rational".
-
- Posts: 5161
- Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various
Re: Is anything ever rational?
Another point you should add is;Maxcady10001 wrote:Here is the model you asked for, based on other models I've seen.
1. Rationality is based on or in accordance with logic or reason
2. Rational behavior, is behavior using logic or reason
3. Logic and reason are used in accordance with information
4. Information is facts provided or learned about something or someone
5. Information is always incomplete (as far as we know it)
6. Information is not evenly distributed
7. Logic and reason vary because of information distribution
8. Logic and reason are limited to information
9. Rational behavior cannot be realized due to limitations in logic and reason
Also, with your introduction of inter-subjectivity to objectivity, i don't even think this matters as anything can be objective based on consensus. You could easily only include yourself in the necessary consensus and conclude that whatever you wish to be objectively rational is rational. A clause like that makes any discussion pointless, because anyone could reject what anyone else considers a fact or objective (i'm absolutely not saying that rationality not being objective is a fact, it is only the way i'm able to see it).
- 10. Rationality is conditioned by background model assumptions, principles, etc. describing how the problem is framed and formulated
Find me any philosophical theories that indicate: 'rationality' = perfection or require perfect knowledge.
I am very confident you will not find nor produce any.
Suggest you abandon your thesis.
-
- Posts: 460
- Joined: September 12th, 2017, 6:03 pm
Re: Is anything ever rational?
-
- Posts: 460
- Joined: September 12th, 2017, 6:03 pm
Re: Is anything ever rational?
- Burning ghost
- Posts: 3065
- Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am
Re: Is anything ever rational?
How can a scientific study prove anything without looking at it rationally? You contradict yourself with what I assume to be a sloppy use of language.Maxcady10001 wrote:Burning Ghost, I thought there was objectivity, but apparently its reliant on inter-subjectivity and there is not any objectivity (read Spectrum's post). The addition of human psychology only adds to the credit of the idea people are not rational. How emotional people are, only proves how irrational people are, emotionality is as much a detriment to rationality as a help, but probably more of a detriment.
Meaning if you can rationally prove we are not rational then you've proven yourself wrong. It is a pure tautology, yet a VERY interesting one. Is that what you're getting at?
The same goes for what I assume Spectrum referred to as "inter-subjective", although you may be confusing me with him because it sounds very much like the kind of term I use over and over.
Something objective means that it is objectively verified by individual "subjects". It is simply a matter of what is common parse. We tend to use the terms "subject" and "object" as a matter of positional distinction. In language this helps so we know what we're all referring to, and we tend to call what we are all referring to as being an "object". When we really cut into the semantics, ontology, epistemology of the situation it necessarily falls apart as the objective distinctions are further refined, or overturned.
Philosophy is a deeply pedantic field to get involved in. If you wish to bring a particular theme of "rational" to the table then the onus is on you to present it as clearly as you can. It is then our job to rip it up until we find, en masse, find some reasonably nice dance to dance and see what we can do with it (if anything).
-
- Posts: 460
- Joined: September 12th, 2017, 6:03 pm
Re: Is anything ever rational?
Statement ro be determined correct:
Rational behavior can be considered rational objectively, and subjectively the definition of rational behavior must be restricted to the individual's ability to use reason and logic, which does not require complete or perfect information to use.
-
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: March 8th, 2013, 12:46 pm
Re: Is anything ever rational?
An act is simply itself, it is neither rational or irrational.Maxcady10001 wrote:How is it possible to act rationally without full knowledge of the consequences of your actions.
To say something is rational, meaning logical, is to usually to describe the nature of the relationship between propositions. What the propositions stand for doesn't matter. To say 'If the moon is made of cheese the moon is a kind of cheese' is perfectly rational.
Later you say:
It need not. However, if you wish to put forward a definition that does involve those things then you would have to be more precise than 'will involve'. But even then, since your definition also includes a necessity for omniscience, which we do not have, then your definition already includes the condition 'cannot exist'.Any definition of rationality will involve logic and reason and sound judgement,...
It is like me insisting the definition of 'cat' is 'a non-existent animal' and then asking; Are there such things as cats?
-
- Posts: 10339
- Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Re: Is anything ever rational?
I take this to mean that you are saying that Maxcady10001 is implicitly asserting that a definition of rationality does not exist.It need not. However, if you wish to put forward a definition that does involve those things then you would have to be more precise than 'will involve'. But even then, since your definition also includes a necessity for omniscience, which we do not have, then your definition already includes the condition 'cannot exist'.
So (I think) you're saying that he/she is falling into a "begging the question" logical fallacy in trying to make a rational argument as to why rationality doesn't exist?It is like me insisting the definition of 'cat' is 'a non-existent animal' and then asking; Are there such things as cats?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023