trc@houca.UUCP (T.CRAVER) (08/30/83)
Response to Laura Creighton: Your points are mostly in agreement with my ideas on the topic. I might clear up 3a - it is not "Not understanding" rationality, but actually the irrationality that might arise from trying to act in that manner that would give rise to a rights conflict. And in point 3c, it should be ideally be a case of not really knowing that there is additional information of importance. However if, due to pressures of time, one must act, it is possible to act rationally even knowing that one does not have all the necessary information yet. (Sometimes any action taken is better than no action at all.) On 3d, my statements about rationally avoiding calamities can be taken as short term, as you imply (to avoid dangerous situations, one must recognize the dangers), or on the long term, as inventions reduce the likelihood of dangers. (The new dangers of a jet plane crash are actually *reduced* from the dangers that would have been experienced, say in driving cross country.) OK: The BIG QUESTION: Since the rational capability seems to be in-born, I presume that it is genetic, and like so many other genetic factors, must be used in order to stay strong. What would it mean for rationality to vary from person to person? Even supposing that it somehow did (and this is the real answer to your question), there is a final test of rationality - and that is reality, and the success of one's independent actions therein. I do not mean that one has to do everything from scratch, etc, but simply that it is possible to determine, from reality, whether one is basically living off of others, or supporting one's self by one's own productivity. Not just material productivity, and not just mental efforts that lead to material productivity, but I would also include the realm that is commonly called "the spirit". If one is not being psychologically independent, one is not producing one's "soul", but is letting others do it for one - a sort of mental parasitism. In short, one can tell from the success at achieving *valid* goals (and I claim that self-interest is the way to determine those) whether someone is being rational. It is here that intelligence enters in - it is also possible to tell, from past examples of performance, just how much intelligence a person has to bring to the task of exercising their rational capabilities. If one sees an intelligent person just getting by, one can usually judge fairly that that person is not really exercising their rational abilities to the fullest extent. Again, I am not speaking only of materially getting by - one's intelligence applied rationally can help one equally well in the "spiritual" realm. In fact, it is even more crucial here, because one cannot so easily live off the productivity of others, as a robber might in the material realm. The robber can steal the best that civilization has produced. This is not possible in the realm of the mind - one really does have to work at that one's self, or else the product is a sham, and easily detected as such. Tom Craver houti!trc
laura@utcsstat.UUCP (Laura Creighton) (09/01/83)
Perhaps I did not understand your answer, but I think that you missed the whole question. Suppose that you and I each perfected our lives so that we each achieved perfect t-rationality. By what law do you assume that we will not come into conflict? If we will come into conflict, can we resolve our difficulties? Let me try this another way in case this is not clear. I get the distinct impression that t-rationality is some universal quality which any number of people can share. Why is this the case? Postulating a genetic basis is not quite good enough. I can predict that all humans have eyes, for instance, but that does not tell me that all eyes are blue (or if it does then there is something wrong with my theory). In the same way, though all humans can act t-rationally, I have no guarantee that they are going to act the same way -- which will make for difficulties. Do you see what I am getting at? If this does not make sense I will go away and try again later. laura creighton utzoo!utcsstat!laura