Rationalizing: How do we know for sure that we aren't?

Arminus, look at the topic of this discussion.

Again: Where did I say that?

As I said Arminus, rationalization (positive or negative) is deceptive and it has been demonstrated to be so.

Yes, you said that, and you were wrong.

Rationalizing has another meaning too, and that is very different from your ā€œinterpretationā€ of it.

I think your reactions have provided at least some evidence that rationalisations (positive or negative) are deceptive.

It is just the other way around. Think, for example, of your reactions. :slight_smile:

I have Arminus and I donā€™t dispute that rationalisations (positive or negative) are deceptive and, in this way, I donā€™t feel or think that I am superior to you.

Some rationalisations are not deceptive, other rationalisations are deceptive. It depends on how they are used.

Rationalisations are deceptive for those who are deceptive, especially self-deceptive. You are a self-decptive "Iā€œ, so you have to think that others are deceptive and use rationalisation only for deception, But people are not equal. So there are people who are more deceptive than others. And there are some people who use rationalisation for deception and others who do not or at least seldom. But the main point is that rationalisation has a positive character as well, and this positive character is in conflict with the negative one - there is and will never be a "winnerā€œ. The current zeitgeist has influenced certain people (including you) so much, that this people think rationalisation would only be deceptive, but that is not true.

Arminus (spell-check autocorrected), at the moment you have not providided me with anything inspirational to suggest that you are correct on this matter and the self preservation is ā€œmeaningfulā€ discussion only frustrated you (which implies deceptive rationilzations to me).

Be honest. You are not capable of spelling. Or is spelling also a negative rationalization for you? And - by the way - you used more than a one liner, One Liner, although you used one sentence (although one faked sentence - but do not worry, because you are not the super-faker in this forum).

That is nonsense.

You are the one who is frustrated - namely almost always, because rationalization is always negative to you. Always being frustrated is a very bad and very sad situation, One Liner. I am very sorry for you.

Unfortunately, you are just not capable of rationalizing in a positive way. I often said to you that you should try to understand that rationalizing is not always negative, because it is often positive. But you did not want to learn. That is sad too. So again: I am very sorry for you.

You are what is called a nihilist. I know that it is difficult today to not be a nihilist, but that does not automatically mean that nihilists are right. What makes this even more difficult for you is the fact that you are a pessimist in addition, thus a pessimistic nihilist. Not all nihilists are pessimists, but you are a pessimistic nihilist. I am so sorry for you.

Arminus, compassion is a virtue.

Yes, it is, unless it is misused and misdirected. It can become just as easily a vice without discernment, which may also be a virtue.

Then itā€™s not compassion but other than that, I agree.

The eyes are having it, ey Arc?

Are you enjoying your eye avatars?

Fortunately, signatures and avatars donā€™t work on my iPad.

Yes I am. I am greatly enjoying and employing the internetā€™s green-eyes avatars. Mine are green. Once i have exhausted the green ones to my satisfaction I shall employ the colors of my childrenā€™s eyes, a set of blues and a set of browns.

They say that the eyes are the mirrors to the soul or as I would have it, oneā€™s own psyche.

Is fuse still around these days or has she/he vanished from ILP.

No images at all?

Compassion may be another form of rationalization. Like killing with kindness. Like compassionate euthanasia, broadly defined.

Conversely, rationalization may be a form of self serving compassion, again, we can not be completely sure we are doing it. Knowledge has not much to do with it , feelings and emotions do, this is why rationalization consist of unacceptable knowledge of certain thoughts.

Since the knowledge of certain things is usually suppressed by rationalizing them away, we definitely can not ever know for sure.

The safest assumption we can make is to assume that we are rationilzing (always for perceived positive outcomes) and then act with caution.