A lie I’ve often tried to believe is that people are governed by facts, logic, and reason. I suspect that lie once offered me a sense of security, something objective to depend on. I grew up with scary, unpredictable people, often ruled by emotions and passions, a state of affairs that continues today somewhat, at least in terms of being surrounded by so much addiction, insanity, and societal chaos.
I did just endure the naked men on bikes, a Seattle tradition, as well as the violent aggressive men who want to be women shoving people around and screaming about their rights. Kind of amusing, but how come no one ever screams at them about staying home and making sandwiches? Fine, if you really want to be female, the first thing you will need to do is adopt a cloak of invisibility. No one will ever see you, no one will ever listen to you, no one will ever pay you, and your job is now to just make sandwiches and listen to how women are ruining the world. Poof, look at that, you’ve now achieved female identity. Fortunately I am on the far edges of this rubbish, somewhat unable to conjure up enough energy to even bother to fight for the alleged identity of “womanhood.” I just mention these events because this lie that, “men are more rational and less emotional” probably also needs to swirl the drain and be flushed away.
Which brings me to the next lie, “if you just dismiss, demean, or disregard emotions you will get to live in a more logical, reason based world.” I’ve never really subscribed to that falsehood, but it is a prevailing thought among many. It is a complete lie. The somewhat weird little paradox is that if you genuinely embrace, welcome, and process the world of emotion you will eventually wind up living in a more logical, reason based world. When we repress or suppress emotions they often grow bigger and exert a more powerful influence over us. When we sit with them for a bit, they tend to teach us what we need to know, go away, and leave us in peace.
I’ve watched a lot of people have tantrums, smashing up furniture and punching holes in the walls, all while priding themselves on their “reason based ways” and their ability to allegedly suppress all their emotions. Generally people do this after a long stretch of informing everyone around about how rational and therefore morally superior they are.
In the Western world we seem to have this dreadful and unhealthy relationship with our emotions. We try to numb them and snuff them out. I suppose that is true all over the world, but in the US especially we have just normalized taking a lot of pills, drinking large amounts of crappy beer, binge eating junk, all as a way of avoiding ever having to have a close encounter with ourselves and our emotions.
You certainly don’t have to be as touchy feely as I am or as compelled to navigate the emotional undercurrents in any given situation. That just brings about a whole other set of issues. We all have different personalities, strengths and weaknesses, I’m just saying that declaring oneself to be a member of the “reality based community” is a huge fib, a gigantic fabrication, a lie. We are all human beings. That means we are emotional creatures. I just groaned when a lot of conservatives on the internet a while back decided to mock and ridicule people about the importance of, “facts not feelings.” Why did I groan? Because this is the fastest way to create a world where facts and truth no longer carry any weight.
And here we are now, we have arrived right there, exactly as I feared……
All in good humor here, but when we disrespect one another and demand facts as if we were the personal arbitrator of all things objective and reality based, people tend to just toss out the validity of using “facts” themselves. Hence we now have people unwilling to even define what a “woman” is.
I’ve dealt with a lot of authoritarian bovine poo from both the left and the right, from both Christians and outright atheists. Of course everybody usually denies it…..while they are shrieking rather hysterically at you about their vastly superior grasp of reality and how you’re either going to hell…. or going to global warming hell. Either way, human behavior seems to take the same form and it just screams, I have unhealed, emotional wounds and a complete lack of self control. Sometimes when people are truly desperate, they just attempt to shut down any and all conversation and subject you to censorship so they can just proclaim, everyone agrees with us and there is no opposition.
So avoidance, bullying, and relationship dysfunction, comes in all flavors, all political stripes, and tragically is found in both the Christian religious and the atheist religious. Another way of saying that is, people are often emotionally stunted, relationally dysfunctional lunkheads, with egos five stories higher then their IQ’s.
Follow me for more tips on how to win friends and influence people.
If this post annoys anyone, you can blame Jordan Peterson. I mostly enjoy him, but lately he seems to be suffering from the same affliction, this unwillingness to address the root cause of our various insanities. He likes to try to wrap everything in intellectualism, mockery, and appeals to reason. I’m rather annoyed with his behavior on account of the fact that he actually went to school to deal with people’s psychology, so he should know better. Conversely however, he also nearly died from medicating his own self so as to make his own emotions and feelings go away, so I don’t know what I expect.
“Better” that’s what I expect. I shall now just gesture vaguely and say, “do better. “Heart matters, matter. Pretending we are creatures ruled by reason is like trying to build a civilization in quicksand. It’s a false premise and it doesn’t work.
See, there's this thing called biology... 
Many years ago, I came to this conclusion: logic is what people use to justify their emotional responses.
This is not necessarily a bad thing, but if one’s emotions are coming from a place of disfunction, the efforts to justify them with logic will be just as dysfunctional.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Ah yes, a wise conclusion, indeed. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
The ancient Greeks and Romans understood that civilization depended upon virtue. Human beings are not born being virtuous. Human beings are born with a singularly mad passion to pursue their appetites.
Aristotle introduced the concept of the Golden Mean. Happiness is found not in negating our appetites totally nor by being consumed by them totally. Thus, one of the cardinal virtues is temperance, finding the Golden Mean where we enjoy satisfying our natural appetites. This goes for our emotions as well.
The virtuous expression of our emotions must be cultivated over our lifetime.
Our Christian Western Civilization has collapsed because virtue has been replaced by the mad pursuit of appetites.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The Bible calls it the flesh or sensuality.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: People are Ruled By Reason and Other Lies… – Christ in You
🙌
LikeLiked by 1 person
Applause!!! We are our Creator’s perpetual circus. And if we are somehow not what He intended, then He is not what we claim that He must be ….
LikeLiked by 2 people
Just can’t get my brain around WHY people have such a problem/stumbling block/crisis of sorts/ with Reason.
After all, He who created the alphabet, the Alpha and Omega, with which nothing exists, said, ‘let us Reason together……’ so I take that in the context of ‘what is reasonable?’
Is it reasonable that men parade around naked? Is it reasonable to suggest that boys can be girls? Is it reasonable to think that godless atheists and lying scientists can teach truth regarding God’s structure of life below and above?
Is it reasonable to think Genesis is somehow wrong, untruthful, inaccurate, or outdated? So yeah, a big fan of reason msb, because reason demands we make ultimate choices.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Perhaps part of the problem is that what we call “reason” these days is anything but? It has about as much validity as the term “science” now does.
There is also lots of historical precedence for people committing atrocities under the guise of reason (and under the guise of science, too.)
One problem I see in the modern world is the elevation of human reason as if it carries some moral weight and signifies truth. I think the Bible often tells us to “lean not into our own understanding” and “there is a way that seems right to a man,” to remind us it is actually out of the abundance of the heart that the mouth speaks. It’s the condition of our heart that drives us more so then our ability to reason. Reason itself is a good thing, but reason in the brains of wounded, sinful people is just as much of a train wreck as anything else. Believing themselves wise, we just become fools. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I remember years ago a very smart man said: ‘science is dangerous in the hands of unsanctified minds.’ He did not mean that the danger is solely because so and so is not a believer, but because humans are so inept at holding to absolutes, and make conclusions based on bias. Which way is the wind blowing today?
So while you are right as to not leaning on our own understanding, this is the bedrock of our not ‘reasoning together’ with God, and of course He cannot lie, so there’s a good chance if there is disagreement, it’s not that we are intentionally wrong, but that we maybe have not exhausted our search for facts or truth.
I would ask, ‘is it REASONABLE’ to get on board with gender switcheroos/ or to expect children to think it is REASONABLE to think it is natural to see naked men or women in public, and of course with these simple examples, it is obvious that people are leaning on their own understanding, and are pretty much defaulting from the human race. We do them no favors by being mute.
And also agree w/u, true science has been hi-jacked by people with Dr. in front of their names, but who are highly unreasonable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
All this gender stuff is definitely not reasonable, but pointing out that it is unreasonable/irrational probably works about as well as telling someone to, “just calm down.” That all seems sensible to our own brains, but in practice it just doesn’t work. The root of the problem is not that people are just unaware of how irrational they are being. The root of the problem is actually emotional/spiritual.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, I understand that some people enjoy being deaf to reason, but pointing out absurdity, decadence, and things unnatural, are usually good things, even if not one person agrees.
I also know that most people steer away from debate, but it’s similar to a thousand year old battle between doctrines which are clear as day.
When the Lord said: ‘why do you call me good?’ He was asking them to reason. Dig through tradition, bias, ego, prejudice, and peer pressure, to get to the root. Think about WHY you believe so and so, etc.
Paul also REASONED with them…..from the scriptures. I think I am a most reasonable person too. 😎
LikeLike
The Apostle Paul was well educated, intelligent, and well reasoned I assume, and yet he was out persecuting and arresting Christians. God did not say “Saul, I need you to think critically about this and become more reasonable!” Why didn’t God do that? I suspect because He knows that we people are lead by the problems in our heart, and not by our brain.
LikeLike
Tkx, We’re prob looking at the difference from train track views, parallel, apart, but heading in the same place.
I’m pretty sure ‘Paul’ didn’t persecute anybody, while ‘Saul’ did. A distinction of merit.
When the illustrious Paul stood at Mars Hill, he met the superstitious with NOT doctrine from Romans, as they would have no frame of reference for understanding, so he used the tools he had, with the knowledge that they had, and he clearly ‘reasoned with them,’ meeting their darkness with articulation and power.
I agree, that people today have no interest in reasoning this way, as minds are made up. and have the attention span of a gnat,
When I use the word ‘reason,’ I am speaking not of emotion, but sound argument that can withstand any lousy contradiction.. There are no such reasonable talking heads that I can give for an example .
If a person cannot see the blatant unreasonableness of boys in girls bathrooms ,ie, then they have lost their ability as a thinking person to even try to carry their points.
Such are the days in which we live. If Oprah says it, it must be true. If Osteen says it, it must be true. Two great examples of how people are led to believe what their itching ears want to hear. My .02.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry, I cannot follow you on THIS jihad.
One of the chief reasons we are in such deep sh*t is the fact that for more than three years the world has been dominated by the feeling of fear.
There is nothing wrong with feelings. we have no control over them. The question is: should they have control over us?
The answer is an emphatic NO.
The easiest way to control and ultimately enslave people is to manipulate their feelings and evil people and psychopaths have perfectted this kind of manipulation to an art.
It is important that we recognize and acknowledge our feelings and emotions.
However, that doesn’t mean that we should be governed by them.
For this reason the good Lord gave us logic and reason.
Correctly observing that people are often not ruled by logic and reason but by pure emotions and correctly observing that this leads to all kinds of dysfunction is inconsistent with the idea that we should have more of “heart matters”.
No, we need more reason. Not less.
You call that a lie: “if you just dismiss, demean, or disregard emotions you will get to live in a more logical, reason based world.”
Ah yes, if Jesus didn’t disregard His fealings of fear and pain we would surely be in a better world, wouldn’t we?
The reason we have the ten commandments is precisely because our feelings are not pure and innocent and because it’s not always wise to follow your heart.
That’s also why kids need education. If you are a child your “reason” is often limited to use logic in order to devise a plan how to take your brother’s toy that you covet and to have a rationalisation when your mom reprimants you for taking his toy away.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“There is nothing wrong with feelings. we have no control over them.”
Actually we do! That’s what I’m trying to explain, when we learn how to deal with our feelings, we are no longer controlled by them and no longer vulnerable to manipulation from others. Americans are emotionally manipulated 24/7 by what I would label some very low budget psy/ops. Why is it so easy to yank us about by our emotions? Because we have not dealt with our emotions and mastered our own selves. Self control is a fruit of the spirit! It’s our birthright.
Jesus actually did not, “disregard His feelings of fear and pain.” He wept. He lamented and sweated blood. He begged for the cup to be taken from Him. He got angry and threw over tables. He cried out about feeling forsaken. In the modern West we really seem to be suffering from this false notion that disregarding our feelings and ignoring emotion is a sign of strength and I really believe that what it is, is a weakness, a vulnerability that has transformed us into easily manipulated, mindless sheep.
LikeLike
No, we don’t have control over our feelings.
We have control over our REACTIONS to our feelings.
Show me any biologically normal, straight man who doesn’t feel anything at the sight of a smoking hot woman walking down the street and I’ll show you a unicorn.
Even the guy who is happily married to a great woman he dearly loves cannot avoid the chemical reactions in his body and the feelings they cause.
However, it’s his CHOICE how he reacts to such feelings.
True, Jesus did have all these feelings you mentioned and yet He disregarded them and went to the cross anyway. His mission was more important than His feelings.
As the corona crisis has shown us, 24/7 emotional manipulation is not an exclusively American but a worldwide phenomenon spanning all kinds of cultures and political systems and involving the use of enormous financial resources for the purpose of implementing a ceaseless barrage of manipulative messages.
Also, there is nothing specifically Western about the way we view feelings. For example, we can safely assume that warrior cultures like the Aztecs, Zulus and Samurai did not look too kindly at the display of emotions like fear, compassion and love of the enemy. As far as I know the goals of Buddhism and Hinduism are the complete absence of any feelings, feeling nothing.
Seems to me you are on a jihad against reason just because the world (or men) treated you unfairly and because feelings and emotions are associated with the female and they are viewed as source of irrationality, hysteria and weakness.
Even if that was true, replacing one idiocy with the opposite makes the opposite not less idiotic.
If the world suffers from one thing its the idea that one shoud follow their heart, trust their feelings and do their own thing.
Feelings and emotions are important indicators and motivators but the wise man and woman uses the reason God gave them to know when to follow their feelings and when not to do so.
The world is in a really bad state but it would be in an even worse state if we would throw reason completely out the window.
You don’t have to believe me. If you want to know how a world without reason in which everybody follows their feelings and instincts looks like just look at a horde of apes. How are the females treated in our horde of apes? Not too well, aren’t they?
Yes, sheep are easily manipulated precisely because they act exclusively on instinct and because they lack the capacity to reason.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Show me any biologically normal, straight man who doesn’t feel anything at the sight of a smoking hot woman….”
Well, healthy sexual attraction is not a feeling, just as being cold or hungry are not feelings. Certainly we do “feel” them, but they are the result of our physiology, our biology, and they are not our emotions.
“Also, there is nothing specifically Western about the way we view feelings…..”
I honestly believe there is and that much of Western thought is built upon the work of the Greeks, stoicism, the enlightenment, post modernism, and also the whole protestant work ethic. At the end of the day we have arrived at this emotionless place we currently find ourselves in where science is now god. “Science,” of course, being falsely named and for sale to the highest bidder, but it means devoid of the emotional, devoid of religion, and allegedly reason based.
“Yes, sheep are easily manipulated precisely because they act exclusively on instinct and because they lack the capacity to reason.”
I can explain to you why it is reason based and logical to insist grandma die alone in a hospital, but I cannot explain why it was exceedingly immoral and wrong headed without bringing emotion and spirituality into the equation. The sheep can reason quite well, that is really their whole problem. Those who were able to empathize, to feel their emotions, and to listen to their instincts, quit their jobs rather then participate in what they “felt” was immoral.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Well, healthy sexual attraction is not a feeling, just as being cold or hungry are not feelings. Certainly we do “feel” them, but they are the result of our physiology, our biology, and they are not our emotions.”
Actually, Psychology Today thinks differently:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-pleasure-is-all-yours/202202/the-important-difference-between-emotions-and-feelings
“Emotions are real-time data sparked by sensations in the body. Feelings can be more biased, altered by mental misconceptions.”
I chose to use the words “feelings” and “emotions” interchangeably and in the commonly used broad sense.
Anyway, according to the definition by PT, what I described would be indeed emotions.
With regards to the West, how does, for example, the Hindu view of feelings differ from the Western view?
“At the end of the day we have arrived at this emotionless place”
I have to vehemently disagree. Try to have a rational debate on any controversial topic these days. You’ll get a hyperemotional, irrational orgy of namecalling, mudslinging and logical fallacies with one side maligning and demonizing the other. The deluge of hatred on social media is anything but emotionless.
“where science is now god. “Science,” of course, being falsely named and for sale to the highest bidder, but it means devoid of the emotional, devoid of religion, and allegedly reason based.”
I agree with you that “science” has become a god, being falsely named and for sale to the highest bidder and allegedly reason based.
However, it’s not THE science but only the part of “science” which serves the purposes of powerful interest groups and it’s not devoid of religion or the emotional. “Science” has become a religion which is not to be questioned because there’s a need to fill the void that the rejection of traditional religion has created and because it cannot withstand rational scrutiny and rational criticism. The need for an ersatzreligion and the irrational dogmas of “science” makes it anything but rational.
Anyway, the dichotomy between science and emotions is a false one. “scientific” is not synonymous with “reasonable.”
What is reasonable and what is not depends on our values which science cannot provide.
We have to determine first what our values are, what good and bad is, in order to determine whether something is reasonable or not.
If our highest value was racial purity then exterminating millions of people of the “wrong” race would be reasonable.
If our highest value was “to save the planet” and if humanity was the biggest threat to the planet, then exterminating billions of people through forced abortions/sterilization, diseases, war and famine would be reasonable.
Needless to say, these are NOT my values.
“I can explain to you why it is reason based and logical to insist grandma die alone in a hospital, but I cannot explain why it was exceedingly immoral and wrong headed without bringing emotion and spirituality into the equation. The sheep can reason quite well, that is really their whole problem. Those who were able to empathize, to feel their emotions, and to listen to their instincts, quit their jobs rather then participate in what they “felt” was immoral.”
Based on reason and logic, I can easily explain why it’s irrational to let grandma die alone in a hospital. It’s irrational because grandma is going to die anyway. So there is no reason to protect her from her family visiting her. There is also zero evidence that NOT visiting her prevents any other people form dying. Even if that was the case. Preventing ALL deaths at ANY cost never was and never can be our highest value. The untold psychological damage to grandma’s family and grandma herself cannot be justified by the POTENTIAL saving of a very tiny number of lives.
Nope, the sheep didn’t reason well at all. They were scared crapless and followed in their panic all the other sheep.
My problem was, that I couldn’t switch off my brain and just follow mindlessly the other sheep. I just couldn’t.
Your statement is patently false. It’s false because I know at least one person (me) where refuslng to participate in immoral things was not based on instincts or feelings.
One last thing. To always listen to one’s feelings and always follow one’s instinct is just as stupid as never doing so.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Your statement is patently false. It’s false because I know at least one person (me) where refuslng to participate in immoral things was not based on instincts or feelings.”
Alas, I lack the ability or the skill to properly explain the nature of the problem to people, conservatives especially, and conservative men definitely. There is just such a huge investment in perceiving ourselves as rational, ones as having mastered what is considered to be inferior, which would be instinct and emotion. The reason why I persist in this “jihad” as you call it, is because it is the key to creating connection, relationship, community, perhaps even a form of unity in what is a very divided country built almost exclusively on rugged individualism and the pursuit of power.
As gently as possible, as softly as I know how to ask, how is the conservative commitment to perceiving ourselves as rational working out in the world? What does the fruit we are producing look like? Are we making the world a more moral place? More reason based? Less irrational? Less chaotic?
LikeLike
“Alas, I lack the ability or the skill to properly explain the nature of the problem to people, conservatives especially, and conservative men definitely.”
Just repeating your beloved stereotypes and prejudices doesn’t make them true.
It’s absolutely hillarious.
You’re talking to a guy who was once a member of a communist youth organisation. Not some wimpy democratic socialist or social democrat organisation mind you but a hardcore communist one, carrying the word communist proudly in its name.
You are talking to someone who was a leftist for most of his adult life.
I guess, it never occured to you that certain traits of personality are hardwired and have nothing to do with a person’s political views.
I was an introvert when I was a leftist and I’m still an introvert now, long after my political conversion.
The same is true for other aspects of my personality/character. I wasn’t much interested in feelings then and I’m not much interested in feelings now.
“There is just such a huge investment in perceiving ourselves as rational, ones as having mastered what is considered to be inferior, which would be instinct and emotion.”
You seem to be equally invested in your stereotypes.
So, you mean to tell me that I did certain things not REALLY because of reason but that I did them because of some feelings/emotions and that I lied to myself it was because of reason? Is that what you are saying?
If so, then this is completely nuts, idiotic and insane.
There are only two ways such a statement of yours could be true.
1. You know what I was really thinking and what I was really feeling about things I’ve never shared with anyone.
That would require paranormal abilities on your part.
2. There are no such things as reasonbased decisions/actions. ALL decisions/actions are caused by feelings/emotions.
There is absolutely ZERO evidence for such a preposterous claim.
No one has ever demonstrated how to construct a car purely based on emotions/feelings.
“My feeling tells me that the diameter of the tire should be exactly …”
Yeah, whatever.
If reasonbased decisions can be involved in the construction of a car
then they can be involved in any other area of life.
I don’t have any need for perceiving myself as anything. I don’t find myself that interesting.
I don’t have any need for convincing myself that I mastered anything. I am the way that I am.
It’s much worse than you think. I simply don’t care whether instinct and emotion are inferior or not. Simply not interested. Not my world.
“The reason why I persist in this “jihad” as you call it, is because it is the key to creating connection, relationship, community, perhaps even a form of unity in what is a very divided country built almost exclusively on rugged individualism and the pursuit of power.”
The reason why your jihad will fail, why it will become a quixotic quest is because your assumptions are wrong and not based on reality. Despite the fact that we all have many things in common, we also are different in significant ways.
Therefore, what works for you doesn’t necessarily work for me and what motivates you doesn’t necessarily motivate me.
As flawed as classifications such as MBTI are, there can be no denying that different people have diffrent hardwired traits of their personallity. Among those traits is the extent to which they are dominated by feelings/emotions vs. thinking/reason.
Never mind that a jihad against reason is just stupid because it has never been demonstrated that the absence of reason has led to any improvement of any kind.
As for “rugged individualism” being a problem …
“As gently as possible, as softly as I know how to ask, how is the conservative commitment to perceiving ourselves as rational working out in the world? What does the fruit we are producing look like? Are we making the world a more moral place? More reason based? Less irrational? Less chaotic?”
As well-meaning as possible, as benign and as respectful as can be is my reply.
I’m charitable and assume that the manipulative nature of your questions is purely accidental and unintentional.
You want me to answer how something works out but that something is purely an assumption. I have never heared of such a commitment.
Even if your assumption was true there is an additional implicit assumption that such a commitment has any causal effect on the state of the world.
You want me to answer how the state of the world is purely based on two assumptions.
If I gave you the answer that the world is in bad shape, what would that prove?
Nothing!
LikeLike
Well, that’s certainly an emotionally driven screed.
LikeLike
Translation: “I have no good arguments”
LikeLike
Well, you’ve already unwittingly done an excellent job of demonstrating the point I intended to make in this post. I have no argument, it just is what it.
LikeLike
It also demonstrates the “wisdom” of “follow your feelings”. and what wonderful results doing so gets us.
LikeLike
But we do exactly that anyway, we follow our feelings whether you believe it is wise or not, whether you like the results or not. It simply is what it is. “Out of the condition of the heart, the mouth speaks.”
LikeLike
I’ve refuted that already. The fact that someone is not acting reasonable 1,2, 3 … times does not prove that they do so ALL of the time.or even most of the times.
LikeLike
Well, you seem to have a belief that there is something wrong with being unreasonable and that you are an arbitrator of what is going to be defined as reasonable. That’s a stacked deck and there is no point in discussing it farther since you’ve rigged the game. You haven’t actually refuted anything, you’ve just shut down the conversation.
LikeLike
So?
LikeLiked by 1 person
So? So what? You continue to believe what you want and continue to refuse to hear what I am saying, I suppose. Suit yourself. 🙂
LikeLike
Yes, dear IB. It’s because I didn’t hear what you say, that I wrote that really long “screed”.
Ridiculous!
LikeLike
You did not really hear what I said, you heard what you wanted to hear for the sole purpose of attempting to refute it. So rather then refuting anything, I am twice as certain my observations are correct.
LikeLike
“You did not really hear what I said, you heard what you wanted to hear for the sole purpose of attempting to refute it. So rather then refuting anything, I am twice as certain my observations are correct.”
Just more unsupported claims.
You also said in a prior comment.
“But we do exactly that anyway, we follow our feelings whether you believe it is wise or not, whether you like the results or not. It simply is what it is. “Out of the condition of the heart, the mouth speaks.”
Never mind that you haven’t provided any kind of evidence that we are slaves of our feelings.
If you were right then that would make God a jerk and a sadist.
It would make him a jerk because He gave us commandmends that we couldn’t follow anyway because we were slavishly flollowing our feelings. Any commandment would be utterly pointless.
It would make Him a sadist because He would punish us for our sins despite the fact we couldn’t control or behaviour because He would have made us in such away that we would have to follow our feelings whether we wanted or not.
In short: He´ would punish us for breaking commandments He made impossible for us to follow.
Absent free will there can be no judgement and punishment (unless you’re a sadist, of course).
It would be cruel to create a dog and theno punish the dog for behaving like a dog.
No, God is neither a jerk nor a sadist.
LikeLike
God is not a jerk or a sadist, but He did tell us clearly that “the heart is wicked who can know it” and that “out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.” Our emotions control and direct our behavior. They do not have to! We can deal with the condition of our heart, heal our emotional wounds, and change our behavior.
God is not punishing us for commands we can’t follow, but also, we can’t follow His commands! If we could actually follow the law and be sin free, than Jesus would never have needed to come. The Bible says, “there are none righteous not one.” Therefore our belief that we are rational, not governed by emotions, and have the complete freewill to be sin free is false.
LikeLike
It’s precisely because the heart is wicked and deceitful that we shouldn’t just follow our heart and our feelings but we should first consult with our brain, logic and reason before doing so.
Your response makes no logical sense and it is self-condradictory and it seems to me very confused.
Our emotions control our behaviour but they don’t have to?
If they don’t have to control our behaviour then something else does it. What would that be?
Here’s an analogy. Replace feelings with genes.
If our behaviour was exclusively determined by our genes then the only way to change our behaviour would be to change our genetic makeup. However, since that change (the nature and the scope of the change) would also be directed and determined by our genes there would be no way to escape the dictat of our genes. That would be a fully deterministic world view which makes the existence of free will impossible.
Replace genes with feelings and you will run into the same problem.
“God is not punishing us for commands we can’t follow, but also, we can’t follow His commands”
Yet another self-contradictory statement.
What exactly is then the behaviour that deserves God’s punishment?
Since it is absolutely clear that Jesus took the punishment that was reserved for us it follows inescapably that we deserved that punishment. Suggesting otherwise would mean suggesting that God is a capricious deity who punishes people for no good reason.
Only if we are in control of our actions are we responsible for them.
It would be extremely unjust to punish a person who has no control over their actions.
It would be like punishing a wolf for behaving like a wolf when the wolf has no other choice than doing so.
This is also the underlying principle of “insanity defense”.
See https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/Insanity_defense
The idea that God created beings that are unable to follow His commands and that He would give such commands anyway would indeed turn God into a jerk.
Not only would that be utterly futile but also utterly stupid.
Since God is omniscient and omnipotent He could have created man any way he wanted.
Creating a being that is doomed to failure and then punishing that being for its failure is just sadistic.
If you are telling me that Jesus didn’t take the punishment that we deserved you run into even bigger problems.
Either Jesus deserved the punishment because He had sinned or neither He nor we deserved punishment but He was tortured and killed for no good reason.
That would mean God sent his only begotten son to be brutally tortured and killed for no good reason. That sounds utterly sadistic to me.
“The Bible says, are none righteous not one.” Therefore our belief that we are rational, not governed by emotions, and have the complete freewill to be sin free is false.”
Nope, it doesnt follow logically from that because all it means is that we don’t always CHOOSE to do what God commanded us to do.
The reason why you run into all kinds of logical inconsistencies is because you try to fit God into your philosophy or your private theology.
How about this?
God is omniscient and omnipotent and he could have created humans as beings that are unable to sin and that do always the right thing.
However, doing so would deprive us of freedom and the experience of true love which requires freedom.
Since God loves us he gave us the greatest of all gifts, freedom, at the risk that we misuse that freedom.
He sent His begotten son to take the punishment we deserve because we chose not to follow His commands.
THAT makes logical sense and is consistent.
Now, you can keep replying and insisting on your ideas that we are controlled by our feelings but when your replies involve God then they are only valid if they make logical sense and have no contradictions and logical inconsistencies.
That’s not because of some obsession of mine with logical perfection.
It’s because God IS perfect and so is not only His love but also His logic.
LikeLike
“If our behaviour was exclusively determined by our genes then the only way to change our behaviour would be to change our genetic makeup.”
Unlike our genes, we actually have the ability to change our emotional makeup and therefore change our feelings. When we repent, confess our sins, we are seeking metanoia, transformation, to change our mind and bring it more into alignment with God’s will, with God’s character.
The nature of freedom and freewill are actually complex subjects with a lot more variables them we understand. Many people are stuck in emotional strongholds we don’t even recognize, making us captives, not fully autonomous beings. Such things often shape and direct our behavior.
LikeLike
” you are an arbitrator of what is going to be defined as reasonable.”
Really?
if written about that here: https://insanitybytes2.wordpress.com/2023/06/27/people-are-ruled-by-reason-and-other-lies/#comment-159452
LikeLike
Nope, not once have I ever claimed to be reasonable. In fact, my avatar is actually “insanitybytes.”
LikeLike
IB, Without reason, a person becomes lost down the rabbit hole of their own tortured mind. This is called solipsism. Extreme cases of solipsism are called insanity.
Cultures and civilizations collapse when insanity replaces reason as the coin of the realm.
LikeLike
So perhaps this tendency to treat people like crap, to ignore the fact that people have feelings, to engage in perpetual emotional avoidance, is all rooted in a powerful fear of losing control and going insane? Makes sense to me, especially in a world where people have not learned how to express emotions in a healthy way.
LikeLike
IB, You are describing the human condition. Christian Western Civilization became the greatest civilization in history because its values and methods worked against the human condition.
Christian Western Civilization was based on faith and reason.
LikeLike
It “was” based on faith and reason and everything was totally perfect until one day we just got up and decided to abandon faith and reason? Or perhaps our fear, avoidance, and refusal to have compassion towards one another has contributed to the great reckoning we are currently facing?
LikeLike
IB, Holding Christian Western Civilization a standard of perfection is called the Nirvana Fallacy. It always amazes me how you all never hold your own society with all its depravity (rampant public drug abuse, fornication, defecation, violent crime, rampant theft) to the same standard.
LikeLike
“Nope, not once have I ever claimed to be reasonable. In fact, my avatar is actually “insanitybytes.”
This is completely irrelevant and a red herring.
You accused me of rigging the game. Since I hate repeating myself I referred to my prior comment.
“Well, you seem to have a belief that there is something wrong with being unreasonable and that you are an arbitrator of what is going to be defined as reasonable. That’s a stacked deck and there is no point in discussing it farther since you’ve rigged the game. You haven’t actually refuted anything, you’ve just shut down the conversation.”
Your claim is dishonest.
Why is it dishonest? Because I’ve provided a pretty objective definition of what is reasonable.
You give me YOUR values and tell me YOUR plan and I or any other can determine whether YOUR plan leads to an outcome that is in accordance with YOUR values.
Here’s what I wrote:
“What is reasonable and what is not depends on our values which science cannot provide.
We have to determine first what our values are, what good and bad is, in order to determine whether something is reasonable or not.
If our highest value was racial purity then exterminating millions of people of the “wrong” race would be reasonable.
If our highest value was “to save the planet” and if humanity was the biggest threat to the planet, then exterminating billions of people through forced abortions/sterilization, diseases, war and famine would be reasonable.
Needless to say, these are NOT my values.”
You can claim that I didn’t refute anything all you want. Doesn’t make it true.
Unless you back up your claim with arguments or evidence it’s just a claim like “the moon is made of cheese.”
LikeLike
“You haven’t actually refuted anything”
Really? I’ve dealt with your claims comprehensively in my replies.
You can claim whatever you want. Your readers judge for themselves.
“, you’ve just shut down the conversation”
How so?
LikeLike
just in case you miss it
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Tom, for adding the very important aspect of education.
I want to briefly address the man vs. woman stuff. It is not directed at you or at what you have written in your comment.
Just some general remarks.
I usually stay out of the man vs. woman debates because most of them are just silly.
God is no idiot. He created man and woman for a reason.
That reason is NOT just procreation. There are ways to procreate without involving sex such as cell division and many other forms of asexual reproduction observed in the animal kingkdom.
The purpose of having two different sexes is that each one specializes in a different role for which it is better equipped than the other sex.
Men and women are not only physiologically different but they think differently, process reality differently and make decisions differently.
The male and the female approach to life are both equally valid and equally necessary but both have their limitations.
Only if the male and female approach complement each other can they lead to better or good results.
It’s understandable that women are offended when they are told that their approach is not valid and inferior to the male approach.
However, when they then turn around and declare the female approach as the superior one, the better one, they behave just as stupidly as the men who offended them.
I’m sure, you know the old saying: “If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.”
Well, it’s just as stupid to declare that the male hammer is always the best tool as it is to declare that the female scalpel is always the best one.
Some situations call for the male hammer and some situations call for the female scalpel.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think all that makes sense.
I doubt that insanitybytes22 actually intends to denigrate men. I think her point is that we don’t do well if we all we try to do is suppress our emotions and embrace reason.
Consider the problem. We can try to avoid sin by focusing our mind upon sinning and saying to ourselves, “no, I will not do that.” But that won’t work well because we will still be focusing our mind on the sin.
We cannot empty our mind. We must replace an inappropriate emotion with an appropriate emotion.
Imagine a young man who is trying to avoid pornography. If all he is thinking about is looking at pornography, he is tempting himself. What is his alternative? He can focus his mind on doing good. It doesn’t much matter what he is thinking about so long as he is trying to do what he feels God would have him do, and he makes an effort to take joy in the fact he is doing what he should be doing. If nothing else, he can pray and ask God what he should be doing.
In this life, we cannot “find” ourselves. We are not lost in that sense. We can, however, find our calling, and blessed are the people who do.
LikeLiked by 2 people
You may find this interesting.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on clydeherrin.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, Clyde. 🙂
LikeLike
This is a complex subject, I expanded on it a bit today with a link to the discussion going on here.
https://nightwind777.blogspot.com/2023/06/rule-by-reasonor-not.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is an interesting perspective and one I certainly appreciate.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Citizen Tom and commented:
insanitybytes22 wrote another post I think worth reading and commenting upon. This reblog addresses artaxes’ comments starting here => https://insanitybytes2.wordpress.com/2023/06/27/people-are-ruled-by-reason-and-other-lies/#comment-159290.
So, what do I have to add? I don’t think either insanitybytes22 or artaxes are necessarily wrong. I just think we need to back up a bit and examine the fundamental issues.
It is not fashionable to admit the obvious these days, but there are distinct differences between the sexes. That includes the fact that women tend to exercise a different set of emotions than men. That is, men are just as emotional as women, but men don’t necessarily exercise the same emotions as women. Men and women do seem to have access to the same set of emotions, but each sex tends to emphasize different emotions.
The emotional differences between the sexes begins showing up strongly around puberty. Not coincidentally, children become increasingly difficult to manage at puberty.
What are the emotional differences between the sexes?
Women are designed for nurturing. The emotions that women exhibit most readily are love and empathy. Are women like men subject to lust, anger and greed? Yes, but girls pursue the things they lust for and want with less violence. In addition, love and empathy help girls keep their more negative emotions in check. Nevertheless, even love and empathy can be perverted if we exercise love and empathy without wisdom and understanding. So, girls need to be taught how to control their reactions to their emotions, that is, how to control themselves and to do what is right the right way. Yet many of the people who run the public system don’t even recognize the need to discipline girls. So, many girls don’t receive appropriate discipline and instruction in wisdom in the place where they spend most of their time.
Men are designed for keeping and protecting. Anger is sometimes appropriate, but boys have to be disciplined to exercise control over their anger. Because boys are more apt to pursue their lusts and things they want with violence, boys must obviously be forcefully taught self-control. However, many of the people who run our public schools think drugging boys is more effective than discipline and instruction in wisdom and understanding. So, many boys don’t receive appropriate discipline and instruction in wisdom in the place where they spend most of their time.
What does discipline involve? Check out Hebrews 12:3-11.
When we don’t exercise self-control, we have to be punished. Punishment doesn’t keep us from experiencing any emotions. In fact, punishment induces a few more emotions. The object of punishment is to force a child to consider the consequences of how we respond to our emotions. Without clear consequences of our words and deeds set starkly before us, we don’t have much incentive to think first and then speak and/or act. That is why, in order to exercise self-discipline, we must first receive discipline from an authority figure who we know cares about our welfare.
What does instruction in wisdom and understanding involve?
As the Book of Proverbs makes clear, we need to learn wisdom and to gain understanding so that we can discern the difference between good and evil. It is not enough to be forced to consider the consequences of an unchecked emotion. We must also understand how to respond appropriately.
Note that often the correct response involves responding with the correct emotion. We can choose to hate, and we can choose to love. The Bible calls upon us to love our enemies. That requires an act of will. Instead of just reacting to our emotions, we must learn to choose the emotions we need to feel and exhibit appropriately.
So, what is the problem? Why do we seem to have so many unreasonable people these days? If our educational institutions don’t make the appropriate effort teach either boys or girls how to control themselves, that is, their reactions to their emotions, then we end up with lots of adults who don’t reason well. These adults don’t stop to think because they have not received the discipline they needed as children, and/or they don’t make wise choices because they have not received proper instruction in wisdom and understanding.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Men and women do seem to have access to the same set of emotions, but each sex tends to emphasize different emotions.”
That’s a good point, Tom. That part is probably heavily influenced by the culture we live in, by what emotions are perceived as socially acceptable for each gender to express.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is extremely difficult to distinguish genetic from environmental behavioral differences. It is the old nature or nurture debate. We won’t solve it here.
Men have the physical capacity to be more combative than women. So, I think it logical to expect men to be more overtly aggressive and to have emotions compatible with aggressive behavior. Whatever the cause, men are more physically aggressive than women.
Women, however, can also be aggressive, but they tend to be more subtle. Gossip is a real enough problem.
Civilization requires us to exercise self-control over aggressive behavior. When we don’t exercise proper self-control, as is now happening, our entire society suffers. I think your post describes some of those issues.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good point, Tom. An interesting concept is that while unrestrained aggression is a bad thing, no aggression at all is also a bad thing. I think in the past we’ve discussed the HG Wells novel “The Time Machine,” and how the Eloi become so passive they are immoral, they are willing to let someone die rather then intervene.
I would say both men and women have potential issues with anger. Women can turn it inward which often becomes mental illness and depression/anxiety or they can get very passive aggressive and mean spirited relying on things like backstabbing, gossip, etc. In general men are more inclined to act out physically.
LikeLiked by 1 person
We can feel the same emotions, but act upon them differently. Scarlett O’Hara illustrated that quite well in “Gone With The Wind.” Much of the book is about how Scarlett learns how to control her emotions and assume leadership of her family’s plantation.
LikeLike
Amen, Tom! That’s another great piece of literature that has something valuable to teach us. In psychology and therapy, we actually talk about, “doing a Scarlett,” which is when you lock down those emotional strongholds like, “I shall never be hungry again.” The Bible tells us to tear down our strongholds, to set the captives free. While it’s good to not be hungry and a survival skill at the time, we don’t want to spend our entire lives motivated and controlled by an emotional stronghold from long ago that no longer serves a vital purpose, that actually hinders our growth and enjoyment of today
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, as someone whose lifelong project appears to be “learning how to be comfortable with the uncomfortable” I can appreciate this post. I’m kind of a weird mixed breed of logic/reason (thanks dad) and hyper anxiety (hat tip to mom). This often puts me in the position of being the “level headed” person people turn to in a crisis, while at the same time my insides are utterly wrecked with emotion and anxiety. It’s really a strange mix, but it’s a blessing that has allowed me to kind of see both sides of this coin.
I completely agree that the more we learn to embrace our emotions and allow them to just be with us without reacting, the better we are able to apply reason and logic. Of course I also think men and women are wired to handle these things quite differently. Men are made for war and protection while women for life giving and nurturing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A bit amusing, but I did not realize that the notion that “men are more logical/reason based” was still such a prevailing part of men’s identity! So a complaint about the nature of reason/rational thinking is just perceived as a complaint about men in general, manhood, male identity! Ooops! I’m chuckling because that really was not my intention at all.
Logic can be incredibly “female,” as in cold, pragmatic, unemotional, and sometimes pretty evil. “Nurturing” is often a male characteristic as we see with husbands, fathers, pastors, teachers, and some doctors. These things are not necessarily gender specific, although they will certainly look different depending on who is doing them. One of the signs of the end times is not that people will be illogical and emotional, but rather that we shall be without “natural affection.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tom, Insanitybytes
I am not a psychologist, yet know men and women are different and are opposites sex attracted to each other in a similar manner as magnets.
I became curious after reading your comments and insanitybytes post and googled Psychology Today.
In My Opinion
Insanitybytes post seems to me to be applicable to this difference statement by the article writer.
#1: Women were better at detecting expressions of disgust
“Why? The researchers invoked evolutionary theory as a possible explanation. Because women are the child-bearing gender, they may have a heightened sensitivity to potential contaminants in their environment and might, therefore, be more likely to identify signals of disgust. Conversely, men may show less disgust sensitivity as a way to emphasize their strength and virility.”
As for us men, most of us seem to be more applicable to this observation.
#3: Men spent more time relaxing than women
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/social-instincts/202012/6-subtle-psychological-differences-between-men-and-women
As for the political aspect of this issue, I wrote a post titled ,Urgent Need for a Dame in the USA?
If Interested
As for my personal spiritual opinion on this issue, thank God for His reasoning why He created women and magnetism.
Regards and goodwill blogging.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s an interesting article, Rudy! I think there may be some truth there, women often can pick up on subtleties that men are often trained to ignore. One of the elders at a church I once went to was convinced that men actually have physiology or brain chemistry that alters their focus, so it isn’t intentional on their part. This is why a man cannot find the milk on the front shelf of the fridge, but he can spot a deer 600 yards away down in the bushes. Made me laugh anyway.
Thank you for linking to your post. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Insanitybythes,
I confess, you just repeated what my wife keeps telling me when I open the refrigeration and ask he where she put it in the refrigerator.
This is why a man cannot find the milk on the front shelf of the fridge, but he can spot a deer 600 yards away down in the bushes. ”
:LOL
Regards and goodwill blogging.
“
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ha, it’s easy to be misunderstood these days! I agree that male/female characteristics are not so black and white, but they do trend in specific directions which can’t be ignored either. Our wiring is different, just as God intended. And I so agree that a lack of natural affection is definitely a sign of bad times ahead. We are drowning in it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Russell Brand Gets It! | See, there's this thing called biology...