is irrationality always bad ? i need help !

[Rwandrall]

I am starting to doubt that rationality is the only way to think, i mean outside religion there are phenomenon that we believe in although there is direct evidence contradicting it. An example is love. It has been proven to be a chemical reaction created by hormones, is it the best thing to believe that ? If we all believe that everything we do is only due to chemicals running around our brain, and that life is not really more than anatomy... It is a bit sad is it not ? In that way i can understand people believing in a soul, a purpose, or even a sky daddy.

And since we are all, in one way or another, irrationalists, are we athiests any better than those who believe in God ?
Is blissful ignorance always wrong ?

[fr0d0]

Absolutely.

[Ace Otana]

Well, weather people see it as sad or wonderful doesn't matter. To me anyway. Some people can live happily with nothing but comforting beliefs like religion. I cannot. I want to know the truth, to know about reality and not simply believe in what I want to be true. Science isn't about what we want to be true or not, it's about facts.
Our existance is meaningless, we have no purpose. We are nothing but biological life forms that has a limited time in existance. Yet, I'm happy with that.

The question is, if you had terminal cancer, would you want the doctor to tell you or would you rather him lie to you and tell you something else that is less major and more minor? I would rather know than not know. To me, reality isn't about what you want to be true or not, it's about what it is. If god was part of reality I would accept that but nothing points to that conclusion so I don't see god as real. Just another adult fantasy.
Seeing reality as this comforting, happy and secure place then you are in denial. To have reality match your desires is an obvious delusion. Reality isn't about what you want but what it is. The only time when reality is everything you want is when you are inside your own little bubble.

All in all, I don't want to lie to myself in the aim to feel more comfortable and secure. It's because I know I'm lying to myself that reality kicks in. I want the truth, I want the facts. No matter how hopeless and pointless it may seem.

[AtheistPhil]

I am starting to doubt that rationality is the only way to think, i mean outside religion there are phenomenon that we believe in although there is direct evidence contradicting it. An example is love. It has been proven to be a chemical reaction created by hormones, is it the best thing to believe that ? If we all believe that everything we do is only due to chemicals running around our brain, and that life is not really more than anatomy... It is a bit sad is it not ? In that way i can understand people believing in a soul, a purpose, or even a sky daddy.

It may be sad but if it's the truth you'd better have a heck of a good reason to prefer anything else to it.
As Carl Sagan said: "It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring".
I think fearing that the world might be really cold and inhospitable is natural, as well as considering irrational beliefs to make oneself feel better. But if you do embrace those beliefs, you should know that whatever you do, reality will come back at you the hard way sooner or later. The best way to my knowledge to deal with reality is to face it,. Just like any problem: ignoring it wont get it solved.

Is blissful ignorance always wrong ?

In most cases. The only exception would be when knowledge of reality opens some sort of Pandora's box.

[tackattack]

I think my poe / sarcasm meter is crashing today.. I think I'lll just post tomorrow.

[RedFish]

Could you point me to your evidence that Love is merely a chemical reaction, and nothing more?
For example, consider two lovers. Place one at either side of the universe. No communication possible. Chemical, digital or otherwise. Would they still love? Consider the people you love. Can you feel them, right now? Consider the dead you have loved. Are they within you still, or not at all?
I saw a programme where (yes I mean Stephen) Hawking was discussing his quest for knowledge beyond the event horizon. He said ''We seek to know the mind of God.''
Nowhere in his calculations was the person behind him, whose Love allows him to dream.
Dismiss Love as just chemicals if you like. As far as I'm concerned, the whole of the universe is merely the setting for Love, of one kind or another, to Be. That's why it's so vast, cold, uncompromising and brutal. So we can see what is truly important. And live it in a spectacular setting.
But I'm a romantic. Therefore irrational, eh?

[tavarish]

Do you mean Stephen Hawking?

[Autumnlicious]

I think my poe / sarcasm meter is crashing today.. I think I'lll just post tomorrow.

I thought that earlier, but I can't help but post.

[Ace Otana]

Could you point me to your evidence that Love is merely a chemical reaction, and nothing more?
For example, consider two lovers. Place one at either side of the universe. No communication possible. Chemical, digital or otherwise. Would they still love? Consider the people you love. Can you feel them, right now? Consider the dead you have loved. Are they within you still, or not at all?
I saw a programme where (yes I mean Stephen) Hawking was discussing his quest for knowledge beyond the event horizon. He said ''We seek to know the mind of God.''
Nowhere in his calculations was the person behind him, whose Love allows him to dream.
Dismiss Love as just chemicals if you like. As far as I'm concerned, the whole of the universe is merely the setting for Love, of one kind or another, to Be. That's why it's so vast, cold, uncompromising and brutal. So we can see what is truly important. And live it in a spectacular setting.
But I'm a romantic. Therefore irrational, eh?

"Recent studies in neuroscience have indicated that as people fall in love, the brain consistently releases a certain set of chemicals, including pheromones, dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin, which act in a manner similar to amphetamines, stimulating the brain's pleasure center and leading to side effects such as increased heart rate, loss of appetite and sleep, and an intense feeling of excitement."

Redfish, I fell in love with a girl in my dream. She is completely fictional and yet my feelings of love for her was very real. Her attractiveness both physical and emotional sparked off the emotions of love.

No communication possible. Chemical, digital or otherwise. Would they still love? Consider the people you love. Can you feel them, right now?

Memory of that person's attractiveness both physical and emotional is enough to cause a chemical reaction in the brain that causes that feeling of love. It does not prove the existance of spirits or gods in any way.

If you really think it's possible to experiance the feeling of love without pheromones, dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin then if we removed these chemicals, could you still say you love your girlfriend or wife based on the present or lack of emotional responce to attraction? I love a girl could jessica but without any chemical reactions firing in my brain, I would feel nothing for her. Love is chemial not spiritual.
You know, I could do very well without love. Since I'd rather not love jessica anymore.

[RedFish]

I'm not just talking about sexual attraction. That is an absurd conclusion. Do you only Love those you are sexually attracted to? I love dogs, and motorcycles and many things/ people I am not in the least sexually attracted to. Love can easily be spiritual, although it cannot be quantified, therefore is too easily dismissed. I have several 'Jessicas' in my life. I love them still, despite letting them go. I think science is only too quick to dismiss Love as having any real meaning beyond chemical reaction.
My God is Love. Its reality can be measured by its effects. They are all around you, and easy to see if you can get your head out of your own desires.