If a concept / principle / theory / fact CAN be proven correct by irrational means, is it still counted as rational?
2007-06-10 13:50:04 · 4 answers · asked by Curious Guy 3 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
This is a point of reference question. To answer this we must first determine our point of reference, if it what it rational to us then we can say that it can be rational, since we do not have the license on rationality. If we are to determine what is rational to a universal concept of rationality then no matter how hard we may try if the concept was 'proven' by irrational means then it will be irrational.
We must also sort out if we are talking about moral rationale or logical rationale. May things that may be considered irrational by our society are infact only irrational by a moral rationale, for example genocide is considered by most to be a most irrational behaviour. However genocide does have a clear logical side, it is the systematic killing of a race, as fare as logic goes there is no problem with rationality. Therefore a concept proven by morally irrational means will in many cases be rational.
I beilieve that this question can be answered either way,yes or no, but as for myself, if a concept is 'proven by logically irrational means then the concept is still irrational.
Hope this helps.
2007-06-10 14:05:40 · answer #1 · answered by Arthur N 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah. As an example: my dog has tan fur. It's a fact regardless of how you come to it or don't. An irrational way of reaching that conclusion is to look at her name. To say " 'Jelly'. From that name I can say that dog has tan fur." is an irrational way to come to it, though you would be right. To know my dog's breed and to know her parent's colors, and say "1/2 tan chow, 1/2 sable german shepherd - I bet that dog has tan fur. " is much more rational with a much greater chance of being right (even though it's possible to still be wrong. "Logical" and "rational" don't equal "correct", just sequential). Another can follow your thought process. An irrational thought process isn't a way of proving anything. It's hit and miss, not based on anything.
2007-06-10 15:42:01 · answer #2 · answered by yeahyeah 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes because there are two states - rational and irrational. If we begin with irrational then the irrational of it would be rational.
2007-06-10 14:05:23 · answer #3 · answered by Sophist 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
only if you want it or believe it to be
2007-06-10 13:53:10 · answer #4 · answered by dym5gram 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋