Replies

Rationalists cannot tolerate anything that cannot be reasoned out in their own minds. Cultural evolution manifests itself, in many cases, as tradition. As the article points out, rationalists hate traditions, as long as they themselves cannot see it as rational. I guess the point is that the reasoning of man often falls short of the wisdom of tradition. However, you are right, if a rationalist were truly rational, he would take this into account.

As for economics, once again we have a situation where rationalism falls short of natural processes. Most rationalists see the free market as chaotic and not governed by sound reason. They are right. The free market is governed by every shlub that has ever purchased anything. Socialism, on the other hand, is run by pure reason. It is irrational to say that socialism is better than capitalism, but its perfectly rational to say that capitalism is an irrational process. Once again, a natural, irrational process defeats its rational competitor. Again, however, a truly rational person would acknowledge this. Problem is, most people that consider themselves rational do not. Economics can be applied to the majority of political decisions, not just those involving the economy, which is why I say its not considered nearly enough.

Rationalists cannot tolerate anything that cannot be reasoned out in their own minds. Cultural evolution manifests itself, in many cases, as tradition. As the article points out, rationalists hate traditions, as long as they themselves cannot see it as rational. I guess the point is that the reasoning of man often falls short of the wisdom of tradition. However, you are right, if a rationalist were truly rational, he would take this into account.

Do you think the "rationalist" idea exists in and is dominant or subordinate in (american) politics?

As for economics, once again we have a situation where rationalism falls short of natural processes. Most rationalists see the free market as chaotic and not governed by sound reason. They are right. The free market is governed by every shlub that has ever purchased anything. Socialism, on the other hand, is run by pure reason. It is irrational to say that socialism is better than capitalism, but its perfectly rational to say that capitalism is an irrational process. Once again, a natural, irrational process defeats its rational competitor. Again, however, a truly rational person would acknowledge this. Problem is, most people that consider themselves rational do not. Economics can be applied to the majority of political decisions, not just those involving the economy, which is why I say its not considered nearly enough.

Could you elaborate on your last statement? How do economics affect political decisions so much that they should be considered more than they are?

oh yeah, I'm a bit confused with your first paragraph: you're saying that yes, rationalism or its use can be a product of cultural evolution? Thanks.