In continuation of the previous post and a recent event happened to me personally warranted another reflection on the social normalisers that end up dividing the people more. One of the normaliser which is prevalent within any group of individuals, societies, civilisations is the faculty of rational and its practice as philosophy. As if we try to explain human behaviour, or zooming in on our mind, we will find the "reasoning-emotion" duality and sadly the science has tackled mostly the reasoning part of our mind because of apparent reasons; reasoning has an objective interface which we can extract, isolate, examine, experiment and even teach and instil. Also for the practical reasons, rational is the tool we have used to build our politico-economical structures.
These structures have moulded our way of thinking, dealing with problems in a way that we tend to completely negate the emotional side of the issue. This approach works well within the businesses, corporates, to some extend in policy making but this fails miserably in the context of people level. Most of the problems on people level have mostly the emotional impetus than rational one and the proper solution can only come with factoring in the emotional side of it.
This possesses another problem which is "impossibility" to understand the emotions as they are completely subjective and the only tool we have to express the emotions is the language (which will segue the whole discussion here if we open the inability of languages to completely express what we feel). Hence conversing becomes so important to understand the emotional side of the human beings.
No comments:
Post a Comment