°
We can point at a "why" to explain when we do things.
When we fight we can claim family (or a friend) provoked us. But knowing "why" allows us to misuse the stated purpose for the real reason: the real reason is never the stated reason.
Often a fight is a means to be close, get attention, to feel intensity and release, only to revel in the bonding of the aftermath.
°
No argument makes sense until you are conditioned to believe it.
If a secularist reads every holy text (Bible, Koran, Upanishads, etc.) and is convinced by one, this is not a valid decision. Because Christian reasoning works only if you already believe as a Christian. (Kierkegaard)
Belief primes us to use rationality, which makes us reason toward irrationality.
°
A fight is how you confront someone in a way that they cannot avoid.
The ultimate goal is to get close, though it seems that you are agressively pushing away.
The fight is a bid for attention. The anxious person is seeking confirmation that they are worth your attention.
This is a form of intimate bonding. And while the secure person may be able to walk away (exhibit self control) to do so breaks the relationship.
There can be no closeness (intimacy) when one party is avoidant (stonewalling).
°
You must have experience before reasoning is useful.
Reasoning leads to mutually incommensurate outcomes and antinomies: it is a patch over a tricky piece of reality.
To govern the direction (and hence the usefulness) of "reasoning" we need to look to the fabric of reality, instead of being captured by the delights of assumptive theories.
°
Both religious and scientific sects believe: they have faith in their truth.
This requires a series of steps, but without possession of all knowledge, a leap is required into the surety of belief, and from belief, we make claims on truth.
In this way, Truth is both fact and not fact, real and fabricated, composed of, confused with, but not synonymous with truth.
To explain: a fact does not require explanation or reasoned steps. And yet, truth is founded on a path or sequence of steps, with each step being a small leap. Truth becomes the consensus of several small beliefs, with a smattering of facts.
°
Knowing people are trainable, you can break expectations for your own gains, but it will incur resentment that will lead to confrontation.
Be sure you have a legitimate (logical not emotional) precedence and a grievance they can remediate.
When confronted you can provide them with a choice: accept my behavior or compensate me for compliance.
°
Consider the censorship of literature: "fat" is replaced with "enormous" in Roald Dahl’s books for inclusivity.
While this feels like a restriction, it is an alteration. To alter (despite the insipid logic inspiring it) is simultaneously the "freedom" to generate or create, though censorship does so in a negative sense.
To amend or reshape as a tool of bland political correctness is a waste of existing freedoms; a folly which threatens future freedoms.
°
The skill of rationalization allows for procrastination, but even odder is that it often works to accomplish its goal. While it appears as self-sabotage, it shifts labor onto others: if you can get enough people invested in your success, they will carry you forward due to their anxiety watching you fail.
°
The basic premise of rationality is listening to other people’s arguments (or reality’s realness) to develop your reasons. In listening, you must make space for arguments from which to consider alternative realities or models.
Once someone is assured of their rationality to the extent they are intolerant or blind, it is no longer rationality, but belief, which is irrational.
°
The attitude: somebody must lead, this person is leading, and the only way we get somewhere is to hitch up and pull together. Any direction and action are better than none. Could you stop slowing us down with dissent and questions?
There is a surety from intentional blindness in acceptance beyond reason.
It is beyond reason because it is circular logic, a self-proving tautology that refuses external consideration as valid. The comfort found within is contradictory, which isolates people into a peer network of equal absurdity.
