Is it rational to maximize rationality?

[Whateverist]

Letting art lead you is irrational.

Letting rationality lead you is artless.

Waddayagonna do?

[Excited Penguin]

Tada! You can't avoid it

You can't make good decisions about how rational to be, and when, without being rational

It's one of those catcher in the rye 27 things.

I love that book! Which things are you referring to?

---

Letting art lead you is irrational.

Letting rationality lead you is artless.

Waddayagonna do?

False and...false.
Letting art lead you is not irrational if you like art for it's own sake and it isn't harmful over all(if you care about that) - which we can't exactly know or find out without being rational (waddayaknow?).
Letting rationality lead you might therefore not be artless, at least not necessarily, since being rational might involve art.

[Cephus]

Rationality in all things and if you're not being rational, you're doing something wrong.

[Pyrrho]

So, are people saying that it is rational to be irrational?  Or that it is irrational to be rational?

[Simon Moon]

By maximising rationality, I'm assuming you mean to always be as logical as possible. It seems to me that such an outlook would dull ones appreciation for artistic things like music due to its inherently visceral nature i.e. rarely invoking thought.

It may also cause an inability to suspend disbelief, and thus a lack of enjoyment for fiction ("that would never happen", "this is scientifically inaccurate", "why is she wearing makeup during a zombie apocalypse" etc.).

Also, while strict logicians and pragmatists are exceptionally suited to a lot of fields (programming, economics, law and avoiding harmful delusions to name a few), they tend to over-analyse or correct people in social situations.

...

Actually, having now listed a few possible drawbacks of total rationality, it seems evidently possible to identify and avoid these eventualities through the very same pragmatic mindset that led to them in the first place.  

Argh, my poor little brain can't process vicious circles.

Maybe it would be worth splitting the word rationalism into more specific definitions: logical rationalism - whereby only the path of the pragmatist is taken (sounds slightly sociopathic to me), and pensive rationalism - whereby one imagines the implications of the manner in which they approach life

Appreciating art is a non-rational endeavor. It is outside the purview of rationality. 

Therefore, even the most rational person has the ability to appreciate art without the need to insert a rational thought process. The arts utilize another part of the mind, that does not require rational thought.

When it comes to evaluating existential claims, the physical world around me, philosophy, science, etc, I try to remove all as much irrationality as possible and evaluate purely on the evidence. 

When it comes to appreciating the arts, I suspend my rationality as much as possible, and appreciate it purely on its artistic merit.

Being super rational and appreciating art are not mutually exclusive.

Einstein played violin at a pretty high level. Asimov wrote great sci-fi. Benjamin Franklin played music and invented musical instruments. Brian May (guitarist with Queen) has a PhD in astronomy.

[Simon Moon]

By maximising rationality, I'm assuming you mean to always be as logical as possible. It seems to me that such an outlook would dull ones appreciation for artistic things like music due to its inherently visceral nature i.e. rarely invoking thought.

It may also cause an inability to suspend disbelief, and thus a lack of enjoyment for fiction ("that would never happen", "this is scientifically inaccurate", "why is she wearing makeup during a zombie apocalypse" etc.).

Also, while strict logicians and pragmatists are exceptionally suited to a lot of fields (programming, economics, law and avoiding harmful delusions to name a few), they tend to over-analyse or correct people in social situations.

...

Actually, having now listed a few possible drawbacks of total rationality, it seems evidently possible to identify and avoid these eventualities through the very same pragmatic mindset that led to them in the first place.  

Argh, my poor little brain can't process vicious circles.

Maybe it would be worth splitting the word rationalism into more specific definitions: logical rationalism - whereby only the path of the pragmatist is taken (sounds slightly sociopathic to me), and pensive rationalism - whereby one imagines the implications of the manner in which they approach life

Appreciating art is a non-rational endeavor. It is outside the purview of rationality. 

Therefore, even the most rational person has the ability to appreciate art without the need to insert a rational thought process. The arts utilize another part of the mind, that does not require rational thought.

When it comes to evaluating existential claims, the physical world around me, philosophy, science, etc, I try to remove all irrationality and evaluate purely on the evidence. 

When it comes to appreciating the arts, I suspend my rationality as much as possible, and appreciate it purely on its artistic merit.

Being super rational and appreciating art are not mutually exclusive.

Einstein played violin at a pretty high level. Asimov wrote great sci-fi. Benjamin Franklin played music and invented musical instruments. Brian May (guitarist with Queen) has a PhD in astronomy.

[robvalue]

Penguin: I don't think I've actually read catcher in the rye! It was another one of my dumb jokes, I was going for a mashup of catch 27 and catcher in the rye. I clearly talk far too much crap Or not enough!

Yeaaaaaaaaah... even if your purpose is to appreciate art, you are going to maximise the potential for doing so by being rational. For example, you have to get to where to art is. This requires a rational plan if it's to be done with efficiency. You need to plan the amount of time to spend looking at it, or else risk messing up your life in general and so scupper future chances to enjoy art as much.

So I'm not saying every moment must be spent being rational, but it must be the backbone of your important decision making or else you won't achieve what you want to achieve as well as you could.

[Salacious B. Crumb]

I believe that it is rational to be rational, HOWEVER..

What one person considers rational, another would consider insane. Most of us, consider it irrational to just believe in a god without evidence. A theist would argue that we are the ones being irrational, because we don’t believe in the invisible man in the sky, that they have never seen. They claim to see god in everything they look at. To them, that is rational, to us, that is irrational.

Although, when attempting to look at this objectively, I’d say, if most of the people on this planet answer this honestly, they mostly would all agree that it is rational to be rational. There would be disagreements on practically every subject one may bring up, whether something was rational or not on here, but most would defend what they believe with their own version of rationality.

[Longhorn]

I fucking hate polls :c

[robvalue]

R(x) = rationality based on action x

We want x s.t. R'(x) = 0 and R''(x) < 0

Life is easy when you replace it with maths.