Sola
beta
5 months

Emotions are dangerously underrated in today's political discourse.

Now, I realize that you'll view this with a negative perspective. Some of it may be emotional, but I imagine it's in large part very logical. Something on the line of "emotion clouds judgment" or "logic and emotions don't mix."

On the surface, both of those seem true, but I ultimately disagree with both of those. And I will use logic to support my claim, because emotion and reason indeed mix, and we must use them together if we are to have a society worth living in.

First, think about something you hold dear. Maybe it's people, like family or friends. Maybe it's a concept, like freedom. Maybe it's something material, like food or money. Whatever it is, why do you want it? If you want it for an indirect reason (for example, you value family because that's what family should do), think about why you value that indirect reason.

You'll quickly come to the conclusion that it's just good. There really isn't a fully logical reason for it, but rather a sense of emotion at the end.

So ultimately, emotion doesn't cloud judgment, but rather determine it. That's the purpose of judgments. We don't make judgments because of some physical or logical constants, but instead our emotional response to those things.

This doesn't mean that logic is useless, though. Logic is a useful and powerful tool, but it should be used as a tool to serve the emotions that you hold dear.

Emotion and logic are necessary combination. Logic without emotion can help maximize whatever we decide to maximize, without really knowing why we want more of it. We end up living in a society with so much, yet so little to offer.

2530votes
0.9SOL earned
Vote
Share
Vote
Share
15
183
2530
USA, Fremont
15 comments
|Pez|
I’d argue the exact opposite. People need to stop thinking with their emotions, because it easily lends one to be taken advantage of. But, like you, I recognize the time and the place for both.
1
|Pez|
I suppose we just need a clearer understanding of what’s in the moral realm and can be judged on a moral scale (which is determined by emotion), and what’s strictly amoral and should be judged by logic.
2
Philo 0316Author
|Pez|, what are some situations where emotion has no place? In regards to politics and other decisions that affect society, that is. Like I can see math problems can be amoral, and I didn't really draw this distinction earlier (my apologies there), but I can't think of any instances where suppressing emotions and only using logic is good.
|Pez|
Philo 0316, Gay marriage, for example. Emotions introduced a question of morality that should’ve never existed in the first place. Logically, the sex of your partner should not determine your relationship’s legitimacy.
Philo 0316Author
|Pez|, I don't see why same sex marriage would be an amoral matter. Both sides of the argument on this matter were very emotionally based. The anti-side had fear-based and disgust-based arguments, but the pro-side also had emotional basis, like happiness and love. On purely logical basis, there is no reason to have marriage equality. It's only important when we take emotions into account.
|Pez|
Philo 0316, It’s not in the realm of morality. It’s not affecting anyone else but the consenting adults choosing to get married, thus has no net consequence to society. Because of this, it shouldn’t be judged on ab emotional, moral basis and can only be considered through logic.
1
Philo 0316Author
|Pez|, why is fairness good though? Pure logic can't answer this. Only emotion can.
|Pez|
Philo 0316, Fairness isn’t fundamentally good. Because people without a handicap can walk up stairs and they make up the vast majority, it’d be *fair* to not have any ramps for wheelchairs. But, we chose the “unfair” way and required there to be a ramp for every staircase, even though the handicapped population isn’t proportional. This is to say that fairness isn’t always good. Ramps are good, but they’re not inherently fair when considering cost benefit.
1
Philo 0316Author
|Pez|, you make good points, but they seem unrelated to my main point. Cost benefit analysis isn't just logical. It's ultimately cost to emotions, and benefits to emotions.
|Pez|
Philo 0316, Utility is emotional, not logical?
Philo 0316Author
|Pez|, why is convenience good, if not for its benefit to emotions?
Chickonthenet
Emotions are the problem. The entire reason we built an individual freedom system in the united states was to remove emotion. To make nepotism less prevalent, to make contracts more equal, to take the emotion of favoring likeness and make it less relevant. On the gay marriage topic, that is completely emotional. Without emotion, the purpose of marriage is to procreate. That is clearly not an option in a same sex scenario.
Philo 0316Author
Why is equality or individual freedom important, if not emotions? Also, to add to the marriage thing, it's not even needed for procreation. You can have kids without getting married.
Escape
People also get married and are unable to have children. Or choose not to.
1
lafanga
To me emotions and logic are like wine and vinegar.. they don't mix... but go well together.. emotions teach us self preservation while logic teaches us how to make our lives meaningful.. logic tells us what is right or wrong.. emotions tell is us whether right feels wrong or vice versa. Logic is based on current knowledge.. it can contradict itself over time... emotions are more basal..
5
Write something...
Send