I don’t feel that people hurt because they are unenlightened. I feel they are unenlightened because they do not hurt.
Personality types reveal more than they would seem to. What makes our personality real? Is it really nothing more than conditioning and arbitrarily selected views?
We don’t have uniform instincts across the human spectrum do we? I mean, when people are pushed past reason do they all act the same way? When you are pushed past reason so you must rely on instinct, some of the very fibre of your being is revealed. This was the cornerstone of the philosophy held by the Marquis de Sade, and goes into the art of torture in general.
Some need a hug, some need a slap. Yes, and you can get the same reaction.
I heard a Buddhist teacher say isn’t it funny how our entire economic system is based on the idea that people are rational when there is not a shred of evidence that this is true.
It depends heavily on their prior experience and training, and most need to return to rationality. To make the rational argument, we would have to look at brain science where the “rational” functions and regions are given lower priority than the emotive and instinctive. I am neither an advocate or critic of rationality, not of its own, but putting the rational faculties on a pedestal to date has done little for our practical function or our mental health. Perhaps an integration might be in order?
There is no clear boundary in the brain between high cognitive function such as rationality and the rest? Actually, there is a clearly defined boundary, because they have been able to examine both the rational and instinctive regions under stress. One does shut off the other, or sharply reduce it. I’m not bashing rationality, but the foundation of our awareness precedes it. It doesn’t stem from it.
Rationality is the ability to communicate in a “universally” understandable way between people, and a communication that is interpreted exactly in the same way. Is this even achieved then? With common argots and jargon for careers and disagreement of terms even between different bodies of the scientific community, rationality as defined in your statement exists?
To get to the point, there are observable elements of the human personality, and we have complex symbolism connected to it as well as very abstract language. Metaphor itself arises quite naturally, but would you say there is no rationally identifiable common ground between people? No way to identify when you are in your element socially and when you are not?
So yes, there are different domains of human function, and different degrees of aptitude, and even different predilections. Are these invalid as purely biological bias, or can we learn from them and apply these definitions and understanding to our lives?
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.