This older college professor, Morrie Schwartz, was a victim of ALS, a nerve condition that would eventually end in his death. In response to his illness, he began to 'mentor' an enormous amount of people and even ended up having his own Nightline mini-series.
In the book, Tuesdays with Morrie, Morrie is quoted to say,
"Love is the only rational action."
Does anyone agree with this? Do they disagree? How does this reflect how we perceive emotions? PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR ANSWERS!
2007-01-31
13:49:47
·
16 answers
·
asked by
Atom
2
in
Arts & Humanities
➔ Philosophy
Okay, a lot of you are reaching similar conclusions that I have reached. Now, here's an extension to the question:
Since we, as Americans, went psycho over the 'wisdom' that Morrie gave to basically everyone watching Nightline or reading Tuesdays with Morrie, why do you think such faulty absolutes entrance the American population?
Has there been a 'falling out' of philosophical debate and reasoning in America?
2007-01-31
14:10:43 ·
update #1
In simple way, love is not rational but emotional. Human is emotional as well as rational. Sometime our emotion take over our logic.
2007-02-03 18:59:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think it's rational because it can be explained through scientific and mathematical discourse. At the same time, I think that love has some extent of irrationality because some people follow others around when it's pointless and they have no real reason except that they're in love. But is that love? Can you prove that someone is in love? Or are they clingy? I guess I'm middle of the road, you could be a rational person in a completely irrational relationship or vice versa, but it all comes down to whether or not you're "in love". And is there such thing as love? Can we prove it? We can prove air and gravity and all manner of invisible things, but can we prove and emotional condition? One that doesn't so much effect our brains as it does our senses and our rationality? You tell me. I think it's a currently impossible question to answer without using your opinion. As for your comment about the decline in philosophical discussion, I agree. We need more new ideas, new takes on the old, more defense of our ideas instead the simple statement of them.
2007-01-31 14:51:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by sothisislife 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
like to me is basically an entire heart connection/charm to somebody. yet, in my adventure "love" can exist on many ranges and how that is expressed is the confusing area. Or could I say love is approximately connections to those countless ranges. there is the relationship the place you meet somebody and you're very involved in them. once you're making love that is a superb and mindblowing adventure. yet possibly you do no longer communicate lots, so the social charm or connection isn't there. yet another variety of relationship is the place you communicate, communicate, communicate. So your social connexion is strongly felt, yet possibly the actual loving isn't so good. Then there is likewise the particular relationship (and that i'm keeping this fairly hassle-free) the place your social connexion is marvelous and the actual area is astounding - so there's a the two a strongly felt social and actual charm. that is what we generally look for and is, possibly, the suited. yet those connections/factors of interest may additionally comprise the emotional point, the non secular point, karmic point etc. i'm attempting to maintain it hassle-free. those connections/factors of interest additionally are no longer something to do with the rational questioning innovations. It concerns basically your emotions, instincts, air of secrecy, hormones - call it what you will. And is composed of no longer something. for this reason, love is maximum actual no longer rational and posing the question "Is it seen as irrational to love somebody and tremendously in the event that they have already got an more desirable half?" is for particular - basically for the easy reason which you won't be able to help falling in love with somebody if a majority of those connexions/factors of interest are obvious. In answer to the 2nd area of the question, if the single which you like already has an more desirable half this suggests they are additionally dedicated to one yet another. And the guy you like would possibly no longer have the comparable emotions for you. Or that guy or woman might love you... And basically because of the fact somebody has an more desirable half, how do you be attentive to whether that could be a happy loving relationship ? that is not any longer approximately appropriate and incorrect yet greater approximately appropriate determination and incorrect determination. regrettably, you in basic terms don't be attentive to except you are trying to locate this out..... and consequently the end result can the two be heaven or hell.... --
2016-11-02 00:29:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Love for each other is what we need to end world peace. Love for life is what we need to save our planet.
Love is what we need to enter Gods kingdom. Love is what we need to sustain our lives together in heaven.
Love is the answer to all the problems of the world and the hereafter.
"Love is the only rational action"
Like most of those gone before and most of those to come, I believe this would be the mind-set when faced with death, as it was with Morrie. Nothing else would matter because theres nothing we can take or do about it. I perceive emotion to be part and partial of the process of living to finally be given the option to express your last.
2007-01-31 14:38:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by Truth D 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think that love has to be rational in order for it to have been the 'only rational action.'
I can understand being told you are closer to death than you ever thought you would be, and all of a sudden having the feeling that you needed to reach out to others and make a difference in the world.
That doesn't mean that every experience of love is rational, it just means that nothing else made as much sense to Morrie.
2007-01-31 14:00:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by keengrrl76 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
i can't agree with this statement because love to someone will cause one do irrational things that one would not do if they were not in love. the only exception would to be. if you found your significant other with someone other than yourself and you cared enough about said individual not to go on a killing spree, then i could agree with said statement. then that would be rational, because you care, even though the said person was unfaithful, you still cared enough to keep from going to an extreme.
remember, this was a movie, they try to portray life but, heck, they don't get it right most of the time, they are just trying to sell tickets. real life doesn't follow movie trends for the most part, it's
just what they want to sell. love, as well as trust is earned,
but will always be irrational, no matter the state.
2007-01-31 14:26:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by barrbou214 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Love is rational, but not the only one. However, you could think that because it does take up a large part of some peoples' lives. We percieve emotions either as an irritating sidethought or a guide for life.
2007-01-31 13:57:17
·
answer #7
·
answered by hallucinatingcandles 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ya'll first need to know what love is... many levels of love...big difference between love and lust... When you love someone, you just love them. you don't need to "fall in love"
Of course this is a reflection on how we perceive emotions. Is love an emotion? It's also a reflection on how we deal with religion. Understand love and you have to agree... "Love is the only rational action."
2007-01-31 14:16:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by Happy Bottom 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
a lot of people have no idea what 'love' is. almost everyone confuses it with 'lust'.
lust is hot n' h0rny. lust is euphoric. lust is physically gratifying. and lust is 'IRRATIONAL'.
the perfect explanation of rational love is:
from The Holy Bible:
1 Corinthians 13
Love
1If I speak in the tongues[a] of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames,[b] but have not love, I gain nothing.
4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
2007-01-31 16:33:07
·
answer #9
·
answered by jkk k 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Emotions are the raw ingredients of Gods unconditional love. Undivided by duality Unconditional love is God. As the colors of the rainbow are contained within sunlight, so to are all the aspects of emotions contained within unconditional love.
2007-01-31 16:24:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by Weldon 5
·
0⤊
0⤋