Had to pass this one on, couldn't resist.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

That was a straight enough response to my post Gabriellea, why not stick to the same way of responding all of the time?

Regards ippy

Because I tend to find discussions more interesting. Different people enjoy different experiences. Hence we have theists and atheists as an example of different people enjoying different experiences. Isn't diversity grand.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

It might come from Matt 5, part of which could be paraphrased like this: "Just as God causes the sun to shine and the rain to fall on all no matter whether considered good or bad, so should you express your love to enemies as well as friends so that those who curse you are blessed, those who hate you are loved and those who persecute you are commended to God so that you may be recognized as an expression of the Divine.   Otherwise you are no better than a despised tax collector if you select to give only to those who give to you."  I suspect that it means that 'love' in this case is a state of being which radiates indiscriminately but the self centred mind will tend to put limitations upon it e.g. family, friends, nation etc. which can result in discrimination and even hatred.

Not sure about that. If I despised rather than loved Bashar al-Assad, it would be for what he was doing to other humans - regardless of their religion, race, geography etc. The people he is hurting might not be connected to me in any way other than they are members of the human race. Not seeing what loving Assad will achieve. Not seeing how letting him kill people is an act of love to him or to the people he is killing.

"Love" in this context just seems like a word or concept that can't be defined - much like the concept of "God". It has different and often contradictory meanings to different people.

[Rhiannon]

I think the ‘love’ that Ekim refers to is much more like compassion rather than love. But as you say, it can mean so many things.

[ippy]

Because I tend to find discussions more interesting. Different people enjoy different experiences. Hence we have theists and atheists as an example of different people enjoying different experiences. Isn't diversity grand.

You're right Gabriella, discussion about all sorts is a good thing, it's even more enjoyable when we're all speaking the same language rather than splitting hairs on the language used when the arguments don't go the way we would like them to go.

Regards ippy

[ekim]

Not sure about that. If I despised rather than loved Bashar al-Assad, it would be for what he was doing to other humans - regardless of their religion, race, geography etc. The people he is hurting might not be connected to me in any way other than they are members of the human race. Not seeing what loving Assad will achieve. Not seeing how letting him kill people is an act of love to him or to the people he is killing.

"Love" in this context just seems like a word or concept that can't be defined - much like the concept of "God". It has different and often contradictory meanings to different people.

Yes, 'Love' as a 'state of being' is probably impossible to define, just as 'God' is but it is said to be recognisable when you are in that state. From that 'state' comes the prospect of promoting the well being of others i.e. bringing them into the same 'state', so that they in turn act from that state rather than from the self centred state which drives the politics and religions of the world.  The real jihad is the inner struggle within individuals to consciously remain in the 'love' state rather be taken over by self centred concerns.  Those who fail at this blame others for it and enter into an external jihad.  The initiators of a number of religions have attempted to promote methods to facilitate the transformation of the individual but the history of mankind shows how difficult the process is and how easy it is for self centredness to reassert itself.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

You're right Gabriella, discussion about all sorts is a good thing, it's even more enjoyable when we're all speaking the same language rather than splitting hairs on the language used when the arguments don't go the way we would like them to go.

Regards ippy

That's your interpretation of what is happening on here. My interpretation is that someone disagrees with or challenges generalisations in your pronouncements as they do with other posters, and your response is to claim they are "splitting hairs on the language". I can see why that technique works for you - it means you don't need to spend time or effort defending your opinions or change your mind to form a more nuanced opinion.

I did English A'Level, got an A - we were taught to find the discussion more interesting and enjoyable when people dig deeper into language - not everyone wants to have discussions at the basic level you prefer.

[ippy]

That's your interpretation of what is happening on here. My interpretation is that someone disagrees with or challenges generalisations in your pronouncements as they do with other posters, and your response is to claim they are "splitting hairs on the language". I can see why that technique works for you - it means you don't need to spend time or effort defending your opinions or change your mind to form a more nuanced opinion.

I did English A'Level, got an A - we were taught to find the discussion more interesting and enjoyable when people dig deeper into language - not everyone wants to have discussions at the basic level you prefer.

I suppose it would look like that to you, I note the aggression is still holding there.

Regards ippy

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

I suppose it would look like that to you, I note the aggression is still holding there.

Regards ippy

Ok. I doubt either of us will change our opinions on what constitutes enjoyable discussion on here.

I note your beliefs about aggression in my posts are still holding. It’s fine that you have not defined “aggression” or presented any evidence for your beliefs.

[Sriram]

I think the ‘love’ that Ekim refers to is much more like compassion rather than love. But as you say, it can mean so many things.

Love is the most  misused word in English. It can mean anything from God Himself (Love is God)...to Compassion (I love my patients) ....to Attachment (I love my mom, my child)....to Attraction (I love my girlfriend)....to Sex ( Love making)...to simple desires (I love ice cream).  In no other language that I know of, does one word mean so many, quite opposing, things.

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2016/05/28/love/

 

[ippy]

Love is the most  misused word in English. It can mean anything from God Himself (Love is God)...to Compassion (I love my patients) ....to Attachment (I love my mom, my child)....to Attraction (I love my girlfriend)....to Sex ( Love making)...to simple desires (I love ice cream).  In no other language that I know of, does one word mean so many, quite opposing, things.

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2016/05/28/love/

 

I love the rational, logical and love to see any of the revered irrational knocked down off of its pedestal to where it belongs.

Regards ippy

[ekim]

I love the rational, logical and love to see any of the revered irrational knocked down off of its pedestal to where it belongs.

Regards ippy

I love the irrational like love, beauty, joy and to see the rational and logical kept in balance with the irrational.

[ippy]

I love the irrational like love, beauty, joy and to see the rational and logical kept in balance with the irrational.

I love the irrational like love, beauty, joy and to see the rational and logical kept in balance with the irrational.

Not your usually rational self ekim, what happened?

Regards ippy

[Nearly Sane]

I love the irrational like love, beauty, joy and to see the rational and logical kept in balance with the irrational.

Not your usually rational self ekim, what happened?

Regards ippy

Reads like a very typical and rather wonderful post from ekim. I suspect you are thinking of enki, a different and also much loved poster with a more obvious leaning to 'rationality'

[jeremyp]

the rational and logical kept in balance with the irrational.

Why on Earth does there need to be a balance? How can there possibly be too much rationality and logic. It's like saying "we can't have too much comfortable living, we need to balance it out with some grinding poverty".

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

I love the irrational like love, beauty, joy and to see the rational and logical kept in balance with the irrational.

I agree. The alternative sounds boring and insipid.

But I also think it is logical and rational to make decisions in line with your internal values and goals, which may well be different from someone else's values and goals.

[Nearly Sane]

I agree. The alternative sounds boring and insipid.

But I also think it is logical and rational to make decisions in line with your internal values and goals, which may well be different from someone else's values and goals.

Surely you think it is logical and rational to do that because it is your internal value that it is logical and rational to do that and so on...

[ekim]

Why on Earth does there need to be a balance? How can there possibly be too much rationality and logic. It's like saying "we can't have too much comfortable living, we need to balance it out with some grinding poverty".

1st question: I didn't say there needs to be a balance, I said I love to see the rational and logical kept in balance with the irrational 'like love, beauty, joy'. What others love is up to them.  If they prefer the life of an android that's up to them.  2nd question:  I didn't say that there could be too much rationality and logic just as I did not say there could be too much love, beauty and joy and it's nothing like saying "we can't have too much comfortable living, we need to balance it out with some grinding poverty".  Comfortable living and grinding poverty are more associated with physical existence whereas balancing the rational and irrational are more associated with the mind and it is not a case of swinging from one extreme to another as your analogy suggests but harmonising both.  In terms of the physical, you could say achieving a harmony between the left hemisphere and right hemisphere of the brain and seeing the value of both.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Surely you think it is logical and rational to do that because it is your internal value that it is logical and rational to do that and so on...

Yes that presumably is why I think that. Confirmation bias?

Where do our personal values come from?

[Sriram]

Rationality is like a computer program...sequential and linear.   Life is hardly like that.

The Unconscious Mind is said to make decisions like a parallel processor....and we know that most of out decisions are made by our Unconscious Mind. 

There are too many parameters in life to make purely rational decisions.  Can a computer make all decisions for us?

[Nearly Sane]

Why on Earth does there need to be a balance? How can there possibly be too much rationality and logic. It's like saying "we can't have too much comfortable living, we need to balance it out with some grinding poverty".

Because all wants and desires and motivations are essentially arational. Thinking that rationality is anything more than part of our make up is exceptionally naïve.

[Nearly Sane]

Yes that presumably is why I think that. Confirmation bias?

Where do our personal values come from?

I also think that we dress our decisions in cloak of rationality not understanding quite how irrational we are.


The values seem to be mainly some combination of nature and nurture, but I again think that most if what we consciously think of as our values is a set of massive retrospective justifications to create a coherent narrative.

[jeremyp]

1st question: I didn't say there needs to be a balance, I said I love to see the rational and logical kept in balance with the irrational 'like love, beauty, joy'. What others love is up to them.  If they prefer the life of an android that's up to them.  2nd question:  I didn't say that there could be too much rationality and logic just as I did not say there could be too much love, beauty and joy and it's nothing like saying "we can't have too much comfortable living, we need to balance it out with some grinding poverty".  Comfortable living and grinding poverty are more associated with physical existence whereas balancing the rational and irrational are more associated with the mind and it is not a case of swinging from one extreme to another as your analogy suggests but harmonising both.  In terms of the physical, you could say achieving a harmony between the left hemisphere and right hemisphere of the brain and seeing the value of both.

I want to know why you think that love, beauty and joy are irrational. “Not fully understood” and “irrational” are not synonyms.

[jeremyp]

Rationality is like a computer program...sequential and linear.   Life is hardly like that.

This fails on so many levels. Computer programs are not sequential and linear, for starters.

[jeremyp]

Because all wants and desires and motivations are essentially arational. Thinking that rationality is anything more than part of our make up is exceptionally naïve.

You give the game away by writing “arational”. That’s called moving the goal posts.

[Nearly Sane]

You give the game away by writing “arational”. That’s called moving the goal posts.

No, it's called saying what I think. Deal with the post rather than some mind reading about intentions.