Dr. Michael Blume
cob
That Frisian Girl-ishI spent a lot of time wrestling with the dichotomy of #emotio vs #ratio. And I found that pitting these against each other is a misunderstanding of their relationship.
Humans are awful at rational thought. They have biases pulling them every which way, extremely flawed perceptions, limited, incomplete knowledge in any given situation. We invented notations to do this correctly, rules of deduction, proofs.
On the other hand, humans are really good at emotion. Built in systems on every physiological level. Humans can't be anything but emotional about anything, but are also often pretty bad at decyphering what those emotions signify or where they come from. "Being emotional" is seen as something bad, disqualifying - worse than being wrong.
Emotions arise from needs, and inform actions that fulfill these needs. That's the short loop in which emotions are relevant. If we feel hungry, we get a sense of us needing food, and so we eat. We do not get a reading from a blood sugar sensor. We feel - "getting hangry" is a thing, becoming aggressive to hunt for food. This illustrates how feelings might come from a very reasonable place - need for food, so hungry - but may lead to nonsensical results - snapping at another person.
So here's the actual relationship of ratio and emotio. Not an "against". Rational thought comes in where we feel, and inform ourselves what we need. And then we pick the best course of action to fulfill the need, because acting out on a feeling may not be the best course of action regarding our situation.
We might feel that we should isolate from a situation, because past experiences hurt us. But will isolating lead us to a better situation? Sure, we won't get hurt that way, but it puts us in a lonely place. And may get us feeling unhappy again, because of loneliness. So, what would rational thought tell us here? Pick our company better. So we don't get hurt, but also don't feel lonely.
Emotions are the dashboard of ourselves, full of blinking lights. We need to learn to read them, not ignore them. We need emotional awareness, not suppression. The answer is not ratio versus emotio, it's ratio AND emotio.
Humans are awful at rational thought. They have biases pulling them every which way, extremely flawed perceptions, limited, incomplete knowledge in any given situation. We invented notations to do this correctly, rules of deduction, proofs.
On the other hand, humans are really good at emotion. Built in systems on every physiological level. Humans can't be anything but emotional about anything, but are also often pretty bad at decyphering what those emotions signify or where they come from. "Being emotional" is seen as something bad, disqualifying - worse than being wrong.
Emotions arise from needs, and inform actions that fulfill these needs. That's the short loop in which emotions are relevant. If we feel hungry, we get a sense of us needing food, and so we eat. We do not get a reading from a blood sugar sensor. We feel - "getting hangry" is a thing, becoming aggressive to hunt for food. This illustrates how feelings might come from a very reasonable place - need for food, so hungry - but may lead to nonsensical results - snapping at another person.
So here's the actual relationship of ratio and emotio. Not an "against". Rational thought comes in where we feel, and inform ourselves what we need. And then we pick the best course of action to fulfill the need, because acting out on a feeling may not be the best course of action regarding our situation.
We might feel that we should isolate from a situation, because past experiences hurt us. But will isolating lead us to a better situation? Sure, we won't get hurt that way, but it puts us in a lonely place. And may get us feeling unhappy again, because of loneliness. So, what would rational thought tell us here? Pick our company better. So we don't get hurt, but also don't feel lonely.
Emotions are the dashboard of ourselves, full of blinking lights. We need to learn to read them, not ignore them. We need emotional awareness, not suppression. The answer is not ratio versus emotio, it's ratio AND emotio.