On Sat, 14 Jul 2001, Lee Corbin wrote:
> Eliezer writes
> > One of the things I really object to is the idea that
> > rationality is somehow "incomplete", that there's
> > something outside rationality that has the power to
> > dictate whether I should be rational, rather than
> > the other way around.
> I completely agree. But despite your qualification
> following the comma, some will invariably persist in
> believing that you mean to demean emotion, intuition,
> aesthetics, and anything else that is not rational.
Ahhh grasshoppers, how can rationality be complete without
irrationality? How can that which is be complete without that which is
not? How can the yin be complete without the yang?
When you put the yin of rationality together with the yang of
irrationality do you not get REALITY...the world which science observes?
And is your science not incomplete without both?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:48 MDT