Comment by hn_throwaway_99
5 days ago
To be honest I don't understand that objection. If you strip it from all its culty sociological effects, one of the original ideas of rationalism was to try to use logical reasoning and statistical techniques to explicitly avoid the pitfalls of known cognitive biases. Given that foundational tenet, "rationalism" seems like an extremely appropriate moniker.
I fully accept that the rationalist community may have morphed into something far beyond that original tenet, but I think rationalism just describes the approach, not that it's the "one true philosophy".
That it refers to a different but confusingly related concept in philosophy is a real downside of the name.
That point seems fair enough to me, as I'm not familiar with the specifics and history of the related concept in philosophy. But that seems different than the objection that calling yourself "rationalist" somehow implies you think that you have the "1 true answer" to the world's problems.
I'm going to start a group called "Mentally Healthy People". We use data, logical thinking, and informal peer review. If you disagree with us, our first question will be "what's wrong with mental health?"
But, to be frank, "Mentally Healthy People" fully acknowledge and accept their emotions, and indeed understand that emotions are the fundamental way that natural selection implements motivation.
Calling yourself "rationalist" doesn't inherently mean that you think you're better than everyone else, or somehow infallible. To me it just means your specific approach to problem solving.
to be frank, "Mentally Healthy People" fully acknowledge and accept their emotions, and indeed understand that emotions are the fundamental way that natural selection implements motivation.
No, no, no! "Mentally Healthy People" is just the name of my group. It has nothing to do with emotions. How could you get confused like that?
So... Psychiatry? Do you think psychiatrists are particularly prone to starting cults? Do you think learning about psychiatry makes you at risk for cult-like behavior?
No. I have no beef with psychology or psychiatry. They're doing good work as far as I can tell. I am poking fun at people who take "rationality" and turn it into a brand name.
3 replies →
Right and to your point, I would say you can distinguish (1) "objective" in the sense of relying on mind-independent data from (2) absolute knowledge, which treats subjects like closed conversations. And you can make similar caveats for "rational".
You can be rational and objective about a given topic without it meaning that the conversation is closed, or that all knowledge has been found. So I'm certainly not a fan of cult dynamics, but I think it's easy to throw an unfair charge at these groups, that their interest in the topic necessitates an absolutist disposition.