Hi Elena, here you go: Propaganda as it existed before the French revolution was a different phenomenon. It was not based on a scientific theory of psychological funcitoning, it was not ideologically justified, and it was not industrialised. And as about rationality. The problem is not rationality. Rationality is something I strive for v…
Hi Elena, here you go: Propaganda as it existed before the French revolution was a different phenomenon. It was not based on a scientific theory of psychological funcitoning, it was not ideologically justified, and it was not industrialised. And as about rationality. The problem is not rationality. Rationality is something I strive for very much myself. The problem is rationalism - the belief that rationality is the ultimate guiding principle of individual and collective life. Think about physicists such as Bohr or Thom who were very much aware that you can study nature in a rational way, but that the essence of it always transcends rational understanding. Hence, reducing life to its rational dimension, inevitably makes you lose the essence of life. Mattias
Dear Mattias, thanks for this. Not to split hairs, but you clearly speak of "rationality", not "rationalism" (which, I agree, is of a different order): "Rationality is a good thing and we need to walk the path of rationality as far as possible, but it is not the end goal. Rational knowledge is not a goal in itself; it is a stairway to a kind of knowledge that transcends rationality...". Which one is it, then? Pure, scientific rationalism (or "scientism") harbours potential risks for totalitarianism, agreed. But rationality, or better, reason (Vernunft) must be the way forward. It is the catering to segments of irrational thought (the performative contradictions) that paved the way for Covid totalitarianism, not a lack thereof. That was the lesson from Orwell. That if there are 5 fingers on one hand, there cannot be three or four. We should be careful if we value truth that we do not invite performative contradictions ourselves.
Using rationality one can infer knowledge that can’t be logically proved. But that isn’t irrationality. Irrationality is when we believe something that is factually incorrect. ‘Rent controls make renting easier’. Yes, in the short run. But not over time. It is irrational to use strict rent controls. Because it is not factual. I believe through observation there is some sort of Organizing Intelligence that is the sum of the collected intelligences, which adds to something more than the parts. Is that correct? It is beyond purely being rational. But my observations tell me this. I infer the existence. Going by strict provable facts I couldn’t believe this. But I do as my inferential logic takes me beyond facts.
Hi Elena, yes, I couldn't agree more. But that's actually one of the things that I stressed on so many occasions, that rationalism (again: not the same as rationality!) always lapses into radical, absurd irrationality. And in chapter 4 of my book, I give the corona crisis as an example. In a certain sense, this is one of the core messages in my book. I never listen to my own podcasts/interviews/presentations, but maybe you can tell me where in my speech I say that rationality is a problem? In any case, I don't think it is. I think we have to follow rationality to the limit. And there we will stumble upon something that transcends rationality. And that's what really matters.
Drawing insights from Mattias' work regarding performative contradictions, where actions conflict with expressed beliefs, eventually fosters discord & disconnect when words diverge from actions. Mattias underscores the current incongruity between speech and action, emphasizing the urgent need for genuine communication and ethical conduct. He adeptly highlights the impact of professed ideals and behavior, urging a more secure embodiment of integrity in both words and deeds.
Reason (Vernunft) transcends being a mere cognitive faculty; it serves as a guiding force, illuminating one's path through logical thinking, problem-solving, and understanding, all imbued with thoughtfulness. These concepts invite reflection on the interplay of one's words and actions, fostering a profound connection between beliefs and the way we live our lives. "Sincere speech leads to psychological strength." Mattias Desmet
Hi Elena, here you go: Propaganda as it existed before the French revolution was a different phenomenon. It was not based on a scientific theory of psychological funcitoning, it was not ideologically justified, and it was not industrialised. And as about rationality. The problem is not rationality. Rationality is something I strive for very much myself. The problem is rationalism - the belief that rationality is the ultimate guiding principle of individual and collective life. Think about physicists such as Bohr or Thom who were very much aware that you can study nature in a rational way, but that the essence of it always transcends rational understanding. Hence, reducing life to its rational dimension, inevitably makes you lose the essence of life. Mattias
Dear Mattias, thanks for this. Not to split hairs, but you clearly speak of "rationality", not "rationalism" (which, I agree, is of a different order): "Rationality is a good thing and we need to walk the path of rationality as far as possible, but it is not the end goal. Rational knowledge is not a goal in itself; it is a stairway to a kind of knowledge that transcends rationality...". Which one is it, then? Pure, scientific rationalism (or "scientism") harbours potential risks for totalitarianism, agreed. But rationality, or better, reason (Vernunft) must be the way forward. It is the catering to segments of irrational thought (the performative contradictions) that paved the way for Covid totalitarianism, not a lack thereof. That was the lesson from Orwell. That if there are 5 fingers on one hand, there cannot be three or four. We should be careful if we value truth that we do not invite performative contradictions ourselves.
Using rationality one can infer knowledge that can’t be logically proved. But that isn’t irrationality. Irrationality is when we believe something that is factually incorrect. ‘Rent controls make renting easier’. Yes, in the short run. But not over time. It is irrational to use strict rent controls. Because it is not factual. I believe through observation there is some sort of Organizing Intelligence that is the sum of the collected intelligences, which adds to something more than the parts. Is that correct? It is beyond purely being rational. But my observations tell me this. I infer the existence. Going by strict provable facts I couldn’t believe this. But I do as my inferential logic takes me beyond facts.
Hi Elena, yes, I couldn't agree more. But that's actually one of the things that I stressed on so many occasions, that rationalism (again: not the same as rationality!) always lapses into radical, absurd irrationality. And in chapter 4 of my book, I give the corona crisis as an example. In a certain sense, this is one of the core messages in my book. I never listen to my own podcasts/interviews/presentations, but maybe you can tell me where in my speech I say that rationality is a problem? In any case, I don't think it is. I think we have to follow rationality to the limit. And there we will stumble upon something that transcends rationality. And that's what really matters.
Hi Mattias, the quote is directly from the speech to the Romanian parliament.
Are you familiar with Adorno‘s critique of rationalism in the Dialectic of Enlightenment?
Drawing insights from Mattias' work regarding performative contradictions, where actions conflict with expressed beliefs, eventually fosters discord & disconnect when words diverge from actions. Mattias underscores the current incongruity between speech and action, emphasizing the urgent need for genuine communication and ethical conduct. He adeptly highlights the impact of professed ideals and behavior, urging a more secure embodiment of integrity in both words and deeds.
Reason (Vernunft) transcends being a mere cognitive faculty; it serves as a guiding force, illuminating one's path through logical thinking, problem-solving, and understanding, all imbued with thoughtfulness. These concepts invite reflection on the interplay of one's words and actions, fostering a profound connection between beliefs and the way we live our lives. "Sincere speech leads to psychological strength." Mattias Desmet
Thank you both for sharing your thoughts!