Trump Pulls Out of The Paris Accord

[donquixote99]

Your response is evasive. This is because an honest response would force you to engage with the limits of rationality.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Your response is evasive. This is because an honest response would force you to engage with the limits of rationality.

It's neither evasive or dishonest. If you think it's better to live an irrationally illogical life, so be it. In addition, I didn't say logic is everything. Just that your previous post (130) is illogical.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by nailer

It's neither evasive or dishonest. If you think it's better to live an irrationally illogical life, so be it. In addition, I didn't say logic is everything. Just that your previous post (130) is illogical.

What life I choose to live isn't on point, but it's a very telling question. You feel your way of life is being questioned here. It isn't, but your identity/ego structure is.

You made a claim of value, you recall. It was "Better to live life from a rational than an irrational perspective." Then the conversation went off the rails. Why? Because I asked you defend your claim of value, and suddenly your logic failed you. And now I suspect you're in big trouble, because you define yourself as a person who lives a logical life. Oops!

It's OK, NOBODY can defend claims of value logically. We just have to accept we know what is good, without fundamental logic for it. Once you do that, you can perhaps realize that the dichotomy of 'rational/irrational perspective for living life' is terribly false. We are always both. Logic is for 'how' to do things. Doesn't work for the fundamental 'why' do things, however.

[nailer]

tv

Originally Posted by donquixote99

What life I choose to live isn't on point, but it's a very telling question. You feel your way of life is being questioned here. It isn't, but your identity/ego structure is.

You made a claim of value, you recall. It was "Better to live life from a rational than an irrational perspective." Then the conversation went off the rails. Why? Because I asked you defend your claim of value, and suddenly your logic failed you. And now I suspect you're in big trouble, because you define yourself as a person who lives a logical life. Oops!

It's OK, NOBODY can defend claims of value logically. We just have to accept we know what is good, without fundamental logic for it. Once you do that, you can perhaps realize that the dichotomy of 'rational/irrational perspective for living life' is terribly false. We are always both. Logic is for 'how' to do things. Doesn't work for the fundamental 'why' do things, however.

I didn't ask a question.

I stated an opinion. Note that I also said the opposite is okay. Your the one who apparently needs to make value judgements. I do lots of illogical things.

Nice pointless closing lecture.