Emotion Vs. Logic

[RevSkeptic]

Do you think most (almost all) people is swayed over to the point of unreasonableness with emotional appeals rather than appeals to logic?

It sure seems that way with emotional tear jerkers in personal dramas and soap operas both in personal lives and in "entertainment" more popular than inspirational fiction (science fiction) and documentaries.

If that is the case then being dry and humorless, but genuine and moral is a detriment in both personal success and rousing a rebel movement.

The inverse of this would mean being passionate and funloving, but superficial and immoral would make you have a better chance at gaining personal success and rousing unthinking, but passionate people to your side.

The conclusion would mean to make a successful movement Socialist or otherwise would mean rousing hot, passionate, suicidal, homicidal animal-like emotions rather than 'splaining things to get people's head straight. :lol:

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 06:35 am
Do you think most (almost all) people is swayed over to the point of unreasonableness with emotional appeals rather than appeals to logic?

It sure seems that way with emotional tear jerkers in personal dramas and soap operas both in personal lives and in "entertainment" more popular than inspirational fiction (science fiction) and documentaries.
All appeals to logic are appeals to emotion. What you need to ask is, 'are appeals to emotions like fear and racism more powerful than appeals to emotions such as logic and rationality.'

People are not all - rational and they can't "step into" a mindset of rationality and step out when they please. All mentalities involve a degree of reason, desires, fears, etc., to the point that apealing to emotion versus appealing to logic is hardly a defined line, but a concoction of various reference points.

Consider a man who has intense rivalry with his brother in manners of money. He ends up running a bank, and his brother asks him for a lona. While his brother meets all the requirements for acceptance, the numbers can also be skewed to imply that denying him the loan is the better choice. The man might then deny the loan, and argue a completely rational argument for it, since the data is there, but the fact remains that the real cause is his rivalry, not the numerical data.


If that is the case then being dry and humorless, but genuine and moral is a detriment in both personal success and rousing a rebel movement.

The inverse of this would mean being passionate and funloving, but superficial and immoral would make you have a better chance at gaining personal success and rousing unthinking, but passionate people to your side.
All people are swayed by logic, even if they don't admit it (which they often don't). As revolutionaries of the cailber we are, all we can do is fight for what is right, and keep telling people the truth. appeals to emotions in an attempt to manipulate people will only make sheep that are easier for the powerful to control. We are more interested in freeing people's minds, so that those appeals to logic get through more easily and are considered more critically.


The conclusion would mean to make a successful movement Socialist or otherwise would mean rousing hot, passionate, suicidal, homicidal animal-like emotions rather than 'splaining things to get people's head straight. :lol:
Temporarily successful. People who will get easily roused up by that will appreciate whatever ruse the capitalists have against revolutionary ideas.

[Lynx]

There is no alternative to education and understanding.