Skip to main content

Rationalism (I)

· 3 min read

“I want to be, if I can, as sure of the world (the real world around me) as is possible. Now, you can only attain that to a certain degree, but I want the greatest degree of control. I don't… I never involve myself in narcotics of any kind, I don't smoke, I don't drink… because that can easily just fuzz the edges of my rationality, fuzz the edges of my reasoning powers; and I want to be as aware as I possibly can. That means giving up a lot of fantasies that might be comforting, in some ways; but I'm willing to give that up in order to live in an actually real world — as close as I can get to it.”

James Randi (@8:03)

“Economists… forgive me, for those of you who play the lottery… but economists, at least among themselves, refer to the lottery as a ‘stupidity tax’. Because the odds of getting any payoff by investing your money in a lottery ticket are approximately equivalent to flushing the money directly down the toilet (which, by the way, doesn't require you to actually go to the store an buy anything). Why in the world would anybody ever play the lottery?”

Dan Gilbert (@6:10) via The German Component

“One great mistake (and maybe this is the legacy of the Romantic Era) is that we think that all the great feelings of transcendence that you might get in the face of a marvelous piece of art; or you feel in front of a landscape; or the wonderful, oceanic sense you have when you feel love for someone… we have this idea that somehow these are incompatible with being rational. And this is a great problem. There is nothing paradoxical about a rational man or woman falling in love or [swirling?] in front of a Michelangelo. These are the great, wonderful emotions of being an adult human being.”

Ian McEwan (@17:20) via Richard Dawkins

I love quotes; I collect them. Whenever I read or hear a sequence of words that strikes me as true, or as particularly beautiful, cunning or moving, I write it down. Oddly, I have to admit that I love discovering quotations even if the source is considered frivolous or unreliable, e.g. advertising. I guess that the mere realisation that someone else uttered, or put in writing, a thought that one has always regarded as useful or valuable is in itself exciting, no matter the agenda or the legitimacy of the author. In the last few days I have stumbled on these three wonderful videos in YouTube, all of them related to rationalism in one way or another; and I strongly agree with most of what they say. What do you think?