Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
I tend to think that each of these depend on each other. We seem to have reasons for the values we hold important and those values determine the kind of philosophy we have. For me a large part of my philosophy is based on ethics, character. Really don’t want to debate this but I’m curiuos as to how others view this.
I am similar to you in that my values came first, then the development of a philosophy to explain them, then reasoning to support the philosophy. I used to search for a philosophy that already existed…first existentialism, then stoicism, then comparative religion….but now I am making up my own philosophy, which is composed of a little this and a little that. I try to remain realistic; I am leaning toward Zen-ish thinking these days, but I am still fond of a touch of woo.
I am similar to you in that my values came first, then the development of a philosophy to explain them, then reasoning to support the philosophy. I used to search for a philosophy that already existed…first existentialism, then stoicism, then comparative religion….but now I am making up my own philosophy, which is composed of a little this and a little that. I try to remain realistic; I am leaning toward Zen-ish thinking these days, but I am still fond of a touch of woo.
Just to throw a wrench into your philosophical engine saralynn, perhaps there is “good woo” and there is also “bad woo” and probably thus there is also “indifferent woo” - I think a lot of humour plays on woo (usually on the bad stuff), and I think there is “good woo” in much of the zen philosophy? By ‘good’ I mean that these are concepts that don’t quite make sense but just emerge when two other (perfectly legitimate/reasonable) concepts are merged? Maybe unsmoked will have a better answer?
I think ye olde “circular feedback loop” process applys, the foundation being as much as possible the accurate depiction of reality, which is based on reason. It seems to me reason influences values and values influence philosophy, or ought to, anyhow, to this end. Any other order would seem to contain the risk of diminishing reason.
I think ye olde “circular feedback loop” process applys, the foundation being as much as possible the accurate depiction of reality, which is based on reason. It seems to me reason influences values and values influence philosophy, or ought to, anyhow, to this end. Any other order would seem to contain the risk of diminishing reason.
I find this progression to be an entirely accurate assessment Answerer. At the “best reflection of reality” level is reason and in that application of one’s senses merged with “making basic sense” in an intelligent way certainly minimizes the influence of “woo” (especially the bad - totally made up - woo) on the perspective. In the formulation of values from the grounds of reason, well, we can “allow for” the acceptance of some “woo” into these preferences, it’s only natural. And then in constructing a philosophy out of one’s values there is opportunity for some “bad woo” to sneak into the mixture . . . just because one is not always capable of explaining everything to complete satisfaction (human limitations are a given) and to scientific rigor. Of course, then we have reason to come in again in order to streamline the constructed philosophical stance (to squeeze out the woo - especially the “bad woo”).
So there’s a sense of a constant updating (progression) of intellectual understanding. Unfortunately, as saralynn has pointed out, many of us tend to first adopt a particular philosophy and then try to reasonably critique it by seeing if our values are fitting within that framework. This is, in effect, like going into a room backwards, but because of the “loopiness” of the reason-value-philosophy formula, some good usually emerges if one is diligent enough in the application of these intellectual principles.
I’m not sure my values came first, but my emotions certainly did. Emotions produced questions, questiones produced a philosophy and the philosophy was analyzed using reason.
I remember two powerful emotional experiences produced by reflection . Both occurred when I was around 8 years old and both occured at about 2AM because I had awakened in the night. First thought: “Holy Shit I am going to die!” The second revelation had to do with infinity. How can the Universe be infinite? It’s IMPOSSIBLE, but it has to be! . Both these experiences literally changed my life. In fact, since my Dad was a jerk, I developed a bit of an obsession about my mom dying and me ending up stuck with my father…a thought that horrified me. Recognizing mortality created a deep desire in me to please her and to please God so that she wouldn’t be taken away from me. (I didn’t question the concept of God at that age.) That’s when the values appeared….“to be good” was my ultimate value and it entailed many virtues…kindness, generosity, effort, sacrifice. etc. You know…taking out the garbage without being asked.
I think ye olde “circular feedback loop” process applys, the foundation being as much as possible the accurate depiction of reality, which is based on reason. It seems to me reason influences values and values influence philosophy, or ought to, anyhow, to this end. Any other order would seem to contain the risk of diminishing reason.
As a foot-note: Reason is built on reasons. Science and evidence should provide normative force to reasons wherever possible.
I remember two powerful emotional experiences produced by reflection . Both occurred when I was around 8 years old and both occured at about 2AM because I had awakened in the night. First thought: “Holy Shit I am going to die!” The second revelation had to do with infinity. How can the Universe be infinite?
I had similar experiences around that age. I remember laying on my back in the grass in the front yard and being blown away by the idea of eternity - when does it end?
I remember two powerful emotional experiences produced by reflection . Both occurred when I was around 8 years old and both occured at about 2AM because I had awakened in the night. First thought: “Holy Shit I am going to die!” The second revelation had to do with infinity. How can the Universe be infinite?
I had similar experiences around that age. I remember laying on my back in the grass in the front yard and being blown away by the idea of eternity - when does it end?
I think this is a common experience. I recall lying in bed at night and imagining first that the ceiling was gone, then layer by layer the night sky, trying to grasp how it could go on forever.
I think ye olde “circular feedback loop” process applys, the foundation being as much as possible the accurate depiction of reality, which is based on reason. It seems to me reason influences values and values influence philosophy, or ought to, anyhow, to this end. Any other order would seem to contain the risk of diminishing reason.
I think values come first, starting when quite young (before the age of reason, as it were); then reason, trying to work out first justifications for held values and then critiquing them - that’s where philosophy comes in. We only get into looking for an accurate depiction of reality at that point as a means of feeding back into our evaluation of values. Of course, some people go the other way about and get stuck, using reason trying to justify values that have little to do with reality.
I think ye olde “circular feedback loop” process applys, the foundation being as much as possible the accurate depiction of reality, which is based on reason. It seems to me reason influences values and values influence philosophy, or ought to, anyhow, to this end. Any other order would seem to contain the risk of diminishing reason.
As a foot-note: Reason is built on reasons. Science and evidence should provide normative force to reasons wherever possible.
I remember two powerful emotional experiences produced by reflection . Both occurred when I was around 8 years old and both occured at about 2AM because I had awakened in the night. First thought: “Holy Shit I am going to die!” The second revelation had to do with infinity. How can the Universe be infinite?
I had similar experiences around that age. I remember laying on my back in the grass in the front yard and being blown away by the idea of eternity - when does it end?
I think ye olde “circular feedback loop” process applys, the foundation being as much as possible the accurate depiction of reality, which is based on reason. It seems to me reason influences values and values influence philosophy, or ought to, anyhow, to this end. Any other order would seem to contain the risk of diminishing reason.
I think values come first, starting when quite young (before the age of reason, as it were); then reason, trying to work out first justifications for held values and then critiquing them - that’s where philosophy comes in. We only get into looking for an accurate depiction of reality at that point as a means of feeding back into our evaluation of values. Of course, some people go the other way about and get stuck, using reason trying to justify values that have little to do with reality.
really like this thread, some very nice answers but questions we have no answer for might be better left unasked
I think the concepts of infinity and eternity are psychological problems for humans at this stage of our brains evolution because we perceive boundaries all around us, and the two aforementioned concepts are void of boundary. We can’t conceive of everything in the universe not having an edge to it and being bound or constrained in some way. However, the universe and cosmos might be boundless and eternal, and we have a difficult time wrapping our minds around that idea.
Even our philosophies of life/death are built around beginnings and ends. For thousands of years now Theologies and Religions have helped to try and explain eternity, or at least hope for it. Today Theoretical Physicists and Philosophers of Science do the same.
An infinite and eternal cosmos seems logical to me, with boundaries and constraints within.
Sara is right, it is not “I think therefore I am,” but “I feel therefore I am.” Philosophical and/or religious constructs evolve out of responses to emotions, either when one seeks to enhance or mitigate them. We reason as we seek to deal with our feelings elicited by the impact of our environment, including stars or parents. As you seek to avoid pain or approach pleasure elicited by something outside of one’s person, the “Self” begins to evolve, in relation to external stimuli. Values, or the assigning of “this results in pleasure” or “this results in pain,” become attached to the behaviors that result in one or the other. Much later, these become the genesis of abstract philosophies or religion as expressed through language.
