The relationship between intuition, logic, and emotion
Emotions are at the core of every human interaction and play a big part in what makes us individuals. Logic and intuition are tools for that emotional human being to use. Logic is a set of rules that humans have come up that have proven to be successful and are effective in the real world. Intuition is a process that is refined subconsciously through experiences. The evolutionary purpose of both logic and intuition is to satisfy the emotions.
Comments (10)
That human beings fundamental purpose is to experiment and learn. By learning they evolve. Intuition is the creative impulse that allows for change in direction (otherwise we become creatures of habit). Logic is one of those learned tools that we use to learn further. Emotions are like signs on a road, pointing is to me directions or hazards ahead!
On the form poll, I would put intuition (creativity) and emotions as far more fundamental and crucial than logic.
Therein lies human weakness (if it is true).
I don't see emotions as a weakness. I see it as one of the necessary ingredients to create, explore, and learn. It is what makes life interesting.
I agree with you; emotions do make life interesting. I was merely pointing out what is commonly thought of as detrimental effects on rational thinking.
I understand. Thank you for the clarification.
The quote is reminiscent of David Hume’s view.
Imo, emotions is an umbrella term for many, in some ways different, aspects of psyche. There are emotions you can be affected by without enactively being unified with (e.g. love/hate; like, having a romantic attraction to someone you as a conscious being would rather not have), there are emotions that are enactively present to us as conscious beings which prod us or pull us (desires) and are integral to intentions or motivation (these sometimes can consist of the former drives, e.g. love/hate), and then there are emotions that are enactively affective responses to stimuli (pain/pleasure and suffering/happiness … where the two are distinguished).
I’ve for a long time held the belief that all emotions hold their own imbedded reasoning—though, obviously, more sub/unconscious than not—as can also be stated of intuitions. Envy, for example, has its reasoning of “I should have what I don’t have but the other does”; other emotions are harder to pinpoint. One’s conscience—e.g., to counterbalance feelings of envy—can in this sense itself be appraised as another emotion.
Still, I agree. One cannot reason without some underlying emotion (in the broad sense previously outlined); however, one can hold emotions without actively reasoning.
In similar enough manners to Hume's arguments, reasoning can then in part be appraised as an emotive means by which we endorse some emotions and veto others.
For instance, what philosophy—however formal—can be pursued without emotions such as those of interest or curiosity?
Except for psychopathics.
Quoting MonfortS26
I would argue against that humans 'came up' with logic. Logic just is, just as is water, it goes where it goes and we are able to study it.
Quoting MonfortS26
Unless you are in a situation where it is life and death, then you would want to use logic and intuition for survival purposes.
For example, there is food in that cave. I can hear a low growl and i have heard the same growl from a lion before. I should not go in that cave to get the food despite the negative emotions not having food gives me.
How do you know?
I don't know, and i struggled to come up with a solid answer as to why i said this because i've never actually asked myself the question. I'll provide a link to the website i'm stealing this from.
---------------------------------
So the question is whether or not minds invented logic or if, somehow, logic is part of the fabric of the universe (aside from minds). If there was a logic problem in the forest, would anyone solve it?
I see no reason to believe that logic would exist without human minds. We've never stumbled across logic anywhere. It's only something that humans do. However, I don't think it's really a human creation. Humans breath and their hearts beat, but it would be odd to call breathing and blood-circulation "human creations."
What we generally call logic is a refinement of stuff the human brain naturally does -- stuff it evolved to do. The refinement IS a human creation. People like Aristotle quite consciously took mental tricks we all do, codified them, cleaned them up and abstracted them. It's a little like how a hundred-meter dash has constrained the natural human propensity to run.
What we can say is that the universe has certain traits (e.g. the fact that physical lays seem to be the same everywhere) that make it useful for minds to develop logic. Those traits exist independently of humans. Logic is one of the tools we use to grapple with those traits. Mostly, we evolved the tool rather than invented it. The process of Natural Selection invented it, not us.
It's likely that primitive humans used reasoning, since even animals seem to do that: "Every time he grabs the leash, I get taken for a walk. He's grabbing the leash; therefor we're going for a walk."
You can also ask the same question about numbers. Do they exist, or is that a human creation? Certainly there can be fifty leaves on a tree without a human counting them, but the actual concept of "fifty" is a human creation.
---------------------------------
This outlines my line of thought when i said Quoting MPen89
But reading through the list of answers from this website there are some very good points on the counter argument that logic is a man made thing.
Thanks for the brain ache!