Power Analytics v Discourse Ethics - Which Is Rationalty's Source?
Posted on: January 18, 2013 - 1:26pm
Offline
Power Analytics v Discourse Ethics - Which Is Rationalty's Source?
I figured this would be a good opening topic to say hi with. 
Is rationality seeded in the ability to play games to win, or the ability to come up, adhere to, and administer rules?
I ask this because quite often, I get into arguments with other rational people about what rationality really means. Some people believe rationality refers to the judgment to identify and efficiently pursue one's self-interest.
Other people believe rationality refers to the ability to perceive the necessity of order. This can be in natural terms of ordering the environment around us as well as social terms of attributing rules by which everyone can get along.
How is rationality defined?
- Login to post comments
Welcome!
Without looking it up, I'd define it as observing and reacting to stimuli and absorbed information in a logical, scientific fashion.
You can be rational and irrational simultaneously, and everyone is (at least occasionally).
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
I second that. Rationality is the ability to apply logic to best understand reality, within a given paradigm. This allows for a degree of relativity and subjectivity.
For example, if you have discovered a remote island with a population of unicorns, it would be rational for you to hold the belief that unicorns exist. Likewise, it would be rational for me to doubt you, until you have proven your claim.
I think rationality is best described by Bayes' theorem regarding the amount of certainty towards any claim. This, of course, implies that you should be ready to question your biases at any one point in time. You can only be rational, in my opinion, by doing away with absolutes.
"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc