Did we humans create "Reason" just to win arguments? New study sudgests just that!

Source

Yet another interesting article today!

This one is sudgesting that we humans developed reason simply to win arguments. Which to be honest... makes perfect sense to me! (check out my reasoning and self justification!)

Your thoughts...as always.. greatly appreciated!

Peace

Reason is just trying to manipulate someone else to your line of thinking.

The art of language is just one big game of follow the leader.

reply to post by w3nd1g0


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5a512f89c2dd.gif[/atsimg]

I call bull on this one; if people invented reason to win arguments, why don't you see anyone using it in political discussions? Only the biggest BS artist wins in that arena.

reply to post by FortAnthem


lol.. Rowing is the only sport remotely the same as politics.....

Why?

Its the only sport where you spend the entire race looking steadfastly in one direction whilst going as quick as you can in the oposite direction!!!! hahahahaha

So you are saying that this, on an evolutionary scale, does not make sense to you?

How do you think arguments and reasoning developed then?

This makes perfect evolutionary sense to me... it makes sense that someone/some group/some clan/some race who needed to gain an edge at some thing at some point learned to out reason its opposition. Weather this was done by truth or lies is neither here nore there as reasing has nothing to do with truth at the best of times.

Reason is the process you use when you decide weather or not you tell the truth or tell a lie, decide weather to fight or flight, decide weather to sink or swim, decide how to gain an edge in a situation.

Please dont discredit without laying out at least some kind of theory of your own. We all know the politics is full of BS but that only strengthens the argument for it as learned evolved behaviour surely?



Peace

Reason, in the argumentative sense, could simply be an elaborate excuse or justification for a lack of actual knowlege or experience - a kind of "structured speculation" in the positive sense, and a kind of "justified excuse" in the negative sense.

In essence, reasons usually explain "why not" as opposed to "why is", and that is probably the focus of the article. When searching for the truth, reason exists to bridge the gaps between an apparent answer, and an imaginative question.

For example, a child asks "why is the sky blue?" - a logical person might use the reason of air particles and light frequenies and so on, however, the actual reason why the colour blue even exists to sight, is something that can never ultimatley be "answered".

Most people are simply afraid to say "I don't know".