Between Judging and Insight

The old idealistic way of thinking – of the good in itself, of duty in itself, of absolute virtues – this impersonal and non-human (or perhaps all too human) way of seeing and judging things is slowly eroding. However, this erosion is more subconscious than conscious, for this old way is so ingrained in our societies that we still think that we live in terms of such concepts, even if it is clear we do not in all but words. There is no morality, only what one feels is right – there is no essence of virtue, only what one feels is virtuous.

There is a conflict between these abstract concepts and our honest beliefs – and in an age where we have so little insight into what comes from emotion, reason, intuition and inheritance, it is the strongest source, that is, the most animalistic, that triumphs. The abstract notions are an inheritance, a relic of the past, but in modern society where the expectations of values and mindset are not as rigid, dogmatic and strict as before, inheritance, which is a strong force, does not carry the same weight as before in this regard. And so it is our intuition and emotion that wins the conflict (reason is more a tool than a source, and it is the weakest if not trained), but we cannot so easily rid ourselves of these anachronisms. Thus, where conflict occurs, or rather where it is observed or pointed out, our reason comes into play in its only role in this stupefying game: to bridge the gap between the abstract idea and what we feel. These abstract notions are not as clearly defined and rigid as they once may have been, so we make slight adjustments to definitions, concepts etc. until the gap is filled – “philosophy of the gaps”.

It is not the goal of our reason to find flaws with dearly held beliefs, so it is easily satisfied in this endeavour. We have this principle, or idea, that murder is always wrong. On the other hand, we feel that for example abortion should be allowed; having a child is such a life changing experience – and we are quite obsessed with the freedom to control our lives. These two concepts quite clearly collide, but Man is capable of handling contradictions quite well – by cheating its way out. We simply redefine what life is: it is when you consist of so and so many cells, and have a nervous system developed like this and that – and voilá, abortion is not murder!

The co-existence of the old and new mindset is both absurd and ridiculous, and perhaps even unhealthy. The more open society of today, at least in terms of values and beliefs, has allowed our intuition and emotion come to the forefront – before inheritance – but these are unchecked and untamed. Our uncritical belief in ourselves as rational beings does not only hinder the proper development of our intuition and emotion, but it has also left our reason impotent. Without acknowledging the order, place and limitation of each of these, one cannot hope to understand them – and thereby learn to use them.


5 thoughts on “Between Judging and Insight

  1. Is this like a flow of consciousness or something? I’m seeing things I agree with, and things I don’t, but I don’t really see a point.


    • This will in part also be related to our discussion in “Believers in Science”. For there you said that reason validates intuition, but I would dare to claim that in most cases reason defends intuition. While you derive a morality from reason, most people go in the other direction. We are brought up a morality and/or believe in some morality, and then try to justify it by reason. Thereby the conflict, for we try make general what belongs to the particular – and make reasonable what never belonged to reason.

      Abortion is meant as an example to this, to illustrate that our conviction in the immorality of murder does not come from some abstract ideas from reason about murder and life. They come from habit (society) and the intuitive/emotional. These abstract ideas are just an attempt at extrapolating and generalising these feelings. The problem of this process is that instead of searching for the essence of the matter, we assume it lies in reason and logic (see the quote posted before this article), but the essence here does not necessarily lie in reason (but perhaps in chemistry?).


  2. Pingback: Omveltning av alle verdier, del I – De-evaluation | Interactive philosophy

What do you think? Leave a comment:

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s