When studying the meanings of reason and emotion it is often that reason is defined as being synonymous with logic, and emotion with spontaneity. Common associations relate logic with conscious thought and contemplation, and emotion with impulse and reflex. Emotions can undermine reasoning when they “run away with us” (Bastien 66), clouding our judgments and causing us to make bad choices. However, emotion can also enhance reasoning by giving useful guidance whenever the environment fails to provide all the information needed for thoughtful analysis.
There is that “unfortunate and unwarranted implication” (Artz) that emotion has no place in reasoning and most of us have been taught that good decisions are the product of dispassionate and objective thought. Emotions can be considered impediments to rational deliberation, as they can be powerful experiences that usually do not last long and sometimes make us do things we later regret. Today, we are angry with a coworker and want to yell at them. Tomorrow, we reflect and wish we had acted more rationally, regardless of how compelling our argument seemed to be. When you lose your temper in the middle of an argument and start to fling ad homonym remarks at your opponent, it might just cause most rational people to not consider you as having advanced your position at all. Most would say that you lost the argument when you lost your temper. Another obvious example of emotional contamination in rationality can be found in advertising where emotional appeals are often used to cloud the reasoning of consumers. As our impressionistic culture continues to strive for the “newest” and “biggest” enrichments of society, it is easy to be bewitched by the advertisements that readily allure any te...
... middle of paper ...
...he world but could not relate to anything emotionally. This confirms that if we cannot place value on any alternative, then there is no actual difference between our choices, which flaws the entire concept of decision-making. Thus, it is not possible to make rational judgments without emotion.
To conclude, the widely held belief that the effective application of reason requires dispassionate thought is valid in some circumstances where our emotions sweep us up and make us act quickly without any premeditation, causing us to later regret our decisions. However, emotion does not always have to be considered a contaminant that carries the biases and excesses of human desire. Emotion is a necessary component of reasoning as it offers the necessary guidance and direction when the environment fails to provide all the information needed for a clear and thoughtful judgment.
This paper will examine Robert C. Solomon's Emotions and Choices article, to best identify what anger is, and to what extent a rational human being is responsible for their anger. Firstly, Solomon's argument must be described. A quick summation of Solomon's argument can be found in the following four points: Emotions are judgements, emotions are chosen, emotions serve a purpose, and emotions are rational.1 To quote Solomon, he explains that “Emotions are not occurrences, and do not happen to us. They ... may be chosen like an action.”2
...her than the actual decision maker. This shows how severely our irrational decision-making can be influenced by only small changes. This begs the question; can we really trust our often-irrational intuition to make correct decisions? Or is it necessary that we use the more time-consuming rational decision-making every time we are faced with a difficult or complicated decision? I believe intuition can be used to make correct decisions when the situation is known, understood or believed by instinct. However, when the situation is more complex, has broad implications and is not that common, as in the case of the organ donation example, intuition should not be used as it will lead to conclusions and outcomes that may not actually be desired by the decision-maker. Rather, when faced with difficult situations, intuition and reason should be used in conjunction.
Should we let our emotions control us? Should we base our decisions on how we are feeling at a specific time? Perhaps emotion shouldn’t factor at all into our decisions. Some of the characters we have studied exhibit both sides of this question. Luther and Alice from the show Luther fall on opposite sides of the spectrum while Billy Budd takes a hybrid approach.
It has been noted from the text that our perception influences the thinking and decisions we make. It shows that choices differ because of the different understanding that individual have. In addition, our intuition is essential and at many times it provides us with guidance on how to make decisions. However, we can see that this intuition can be misleading at times and therefore the best thing is to evaluate the available evidence before making decisions. In my view decision making tends to have disciplinary across individuals. The best thing can be is to take time and individuals should not rush when it comes to making critical decisions. It is because of the outcomes that might be expected in the
For moreover, Daniel Goleman (2004) explained that emotional intelligence plays an integral role in defining character and determining both our individual and group densities. It involves the ability in monitoring one’s own and others emotion, to discriminate among them, and to use the information to guide one’s thinking and action. It means to embrace the power of emotion intelligently, it involves abilities that may be categorized, into five (5) domains: (1) self-awareness, (2) emotional maturity, (3) self-motivation, (4) emphatic understanding, and (5) quality communication.
... It is unlikely that society will be willing to respond to every situation with rationalization and logical thought – nor should they have to, for emotions have the power to give us a closer connection to the people surrounding us. Even if a person chooses to not make decisions based on Utilitarian logic, the principles are at least capable of opening a person up to the idea that their actions and decisions affect people other than themselves.
A multitude of opinions are found on the subject: are emotions more a function of the heart or of the head? According to Antonio Damasio (1), emotions and feelings are an integral part of all thought; yet we as humans spend much of our time attempting to disregard and hide them. In the view of source (2), experience is the result of integration of cognition and feelings. In either view, it remains indisputable that emotions are not what we typically make them out to be: the unwanted step-sister of our cultural sweetheart reason. Reason in our culture denotes intelligence, cognition, and control. Emotions seems such a "scary" concept to our collective m...
As humans, emotions are an unavoidable occurrence. People get angry, sad, happy, surprised, etcetera. In some cases, it is harder
... Finding the equilibrium between emotion and reason n is crucial for one to be able to make moral decisions that can be justified in an acceptable manner. The ability to balance those two can be very challenging, especially in situation where the emotion side of the brain attempts to take control. It should be kept in mind that emotion and reason can keep reasonable thinking from turning into irrational behavior.
It has long been thought that reason was what moral judgment was based off of. As time changed, emotions have become influential, causally sufficient, and necessary when it comes to forming moral judgments. The authors find that both are present when forming moral judgments (Polzler). This source is credible as it was found in an academic peer-reviewed journal, and on a college sponsored database.
Getting a result from a process of logical thinking does not mean that I cannot be emotional. I can also feel, to love someone or hate someone but I insist that emotions should be led by logical facts and the other way around. When it comes to real business, we should not let emotion clouds our judgments and we should get happy or furious by the facts that presented to us.
It is human nature to desire freedom and yearn passion, yet it is also human nature to obtain acceptance and follow reason. It is a never ending battle between passion and reason; without reason there is no acceptance, without passion there is no freedom. In Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre, Jane strongly struggles between passion and reason. Though Jane loves Mr. Rochester, her employer at Thornfield Hall, she has certain values to uphold in order to conform with society. Jane does not let her affections overtake her morality, though her return to Mr. Rochester proves passion to be stronger than reason.
Sentiments such as beauty, revenge, pleasure, pain, create moral motivation, and action, and are immune to falsity and truth. They are the foundation for which morals are built, and exist apart from any reasoning. Thesis: In moral motivation, the role of sentiment is to drive an intrinsically instilled presence within us to examine what we would deem a moral act or an immoral act, and act accordingly, and accurately upon the sentiments that apply. These sentiments may be assisted by reasons, but the reason alone does not drive us to do what we feel is necessary.
Humans are constantly making decisions during their daily life. According to Huffington Post, an average person makes around 35,000 decisions per day. From choosing which shirt to wear to important life decisions that have long-lasting effects, the decision-making process is very complex. There are mainly two types of decision-making methods. The first method is using intuition, which is taking a decision with one’s “gut” feeling or what it seems to be right without thinking about it logically. The second way of taking a decision is through reason, which carefully analyzing all the data and using logic to conclude to a decision, which is the go-to method when taking important lifelong decisions. Different areas of the brain are responsible
fact how we behave and what we feel is only the tip of the iceberg. I