I see some of my traits in your mother. I also love that someone—you, fortunately—finally addressed this cursed dichotomy of logic and reason. Your analyses and metaphors (the Gino pepper one had me on the floor!) were so apt, I wonder how anyone dares fantasize the existence of these two concepts without offering a correlation. It now urges me to plead with everyone to watch Inside Out 2, because the dichotomy... Then again, a human's intuition / gut / instincts are almost never wrong if you're tuned in adequately. I'd bring up the fact that we are all spiritual beings before we are physical, so the gut isn't necessarily the emotion; it is far above it. People should (MUST) trust their gut, as it is not the same as their emotions.
But anyway, thank you, Adé Adé. You've mayonnaised my tortilla wrap this morning.
Amazing piece as always. Nostalgic even. I thought about all the times I made decisions and used both emotions and logic to get there…
Were they always perfect in execution? God no!
But they were always, always the right decision. You see, with emotions, I’ve always had to question the decisions I make. “Is this right? could I have handled it better, can I take this back?” Etc…
And with logic, it’s underwhelming. “Where’s the fun? Where’s the thrill? Where’s the excitement that I know I can get from this? Where is it? Is this all I get from this?”
But a combination of both? OMG, you mean I can make thrilling decisions that don’t entirely ruin my life?
This is my favorite piece from you yet. The humor, history, and personal anecdotes sprinkled here and there, made for a very interesting read.
Thank you for sharing. Also, justice for those of us that follow our gut instincts, to eat eba at 3 am. I promise you, there's a logic in it, somewhere.
Anyway, well done, Ade. Can't wait to read your next meal.♥️🙌
The instincts sure are not emotions. But the instincts uses emotions to broadcast what they want for us to feel, and if we are conscious enough, we interprete them into thoughts. The instincts sure might not lie, but they are not necessarily telling the truth.
Beautiful piece, Adeseto. And I agree, logic is not necessarily opposed to emotions and feelings. Logic is a tool to dissect and understand the world, emotions and feelings, are for the experience of the world. To take your example of the boy in the rain, emotions would not tell you to stand in the rain. You merely just experience a feeling of giddiness that the rain gives you, and a number of impulses are thrown out, based on wants. If the rain feels good at the time, it means you are satisfying a want from one of your numerous instincts. But if, as it always happens, you begin to say, this feels good, so I will stay here, you are therefore giving yourself a "reason" to stay, because it feels good to you. And that is your logical constituents coming though.
So look at this: at first it feels good, so you stand, due to impulse. But then, you say "this feels good" so you stay, due to reason. Emotions don't appeal or tell you anything, emotions just command. According to Nietzsche, the instincts are tyrannical. Logic appeals, it makes premises, and if the premises clash, that is, if they are contradictory, it means something is off.
Example: "This feels bad" so you go. If you are going to stay, it would not be because it feels bad to you, but because you are curious on why it does, or some other concern. And if in some way you find out that it is actually bad, it wouldn't be due to emotions, but due to rationality or empiricism. If it is not bad, then there must be a reason it isn't.
And on your other example: "Take loss aversion, for example. You’re more afraid of losing $20 than you are excited about gaining $20. Logically, it’s the same amount of money, but emotionally, the two scenarios couldn’t be more different." Empirically it is the same amount, but on further dissection with logic, you should find out that the reason one is sad when they lose 20 dollars, but do not get excited when they gain it, is because people just don't like loss and losing as much as they love gaining, most times, as a result of gaining being seen as deserving, and losing as undeserving.
When Nietzsche says "the instincts are tyrannical", does he refer to instincts as in intuition, or instincts in relation to emotions, or what most would wrongly describe as "gut feeling"? Because, as I have said, we are spiritual beings before we are physical. Gut feeling is not an emotion. The instincts are not either, and they should be listened to most times because that component of our humanity does not lie to our physical vessels.
I see some of my traits in your mother. I also love that someone—you, fortunately—finally addressed this cursed dichotomy of logic and reason. Your analyses and metaphors (the Gino pepper one had me on the floor!) were so apt, I wonder how anyone dares fantasize the existence of these two concepts without offering a correlation. It now urges me to plead with everyone to watch Inside Out 2, because the dichotomy... Then again, a human's intuition / gut / instincts are almost never wrong if you're tuned in adequately. I'd bring up the fact that we are all spiritual beings before we are physical, so the gut isn't necessarily the emotion; it is far above it. People should (MUST) trust their gut, as it is not the same as their emotions.
But anyway, thank you, Adé Adé. You've mayonnaised my tortilla wrap this morning.
Honoured to have mayonnaised your tortilla wrap, my friend.
Amazing piece as always. Nostalgic even. I thought about all the times I made decisions and used both emotions and logic to get there…
Were they always perfect in execution? God no!
But they were always, always the right decision. You see, with emotions, I’ve always had to question the decisions I make. “Is this right? could I have handled it better, can I take this back?” Etc…
And with logic, it’s underwhelming. “Where’s the fun? Where’s the thrill? Where’s the excitement that I know I can get from this? Where is it? Is this all I get from this?”
But a combination of both? OMG, you mean I can make thrilling decisions that don’t entirely ruin my life?
Yes!
Give me 50 of them now!
Good job Seto ❤️
Thank you Simi.❤️
This is my favorite piece from you yet. The humor, history, and personal anecdotes sprinkled here and there, made for a very interesting read.
Thank you for sharing. Also, justice for those of us that follow our gut instincts, to eat eba at 3 am. I promise you, there's a logic in it, somewhere.
Anyway, well done, Ade. Can't wait to read your next meal.♥️🙌
Thank you, Tunmise.
🫡🫡
The instincts sure are not emotions. But the instincts uses emotions to broadcast what they want for us to feel, and if we are conscious enough, we interprete them into thoughts. The instincts sure might not lie, but they are not necessarily telling the truth.
Beautiful piece, Adeseto. And I agree, logic is not necessarily opposed to emotions and feelings. Logic is a tool to dissect and understand the world, emotions and feelings, are for the experience of the world. To take your example of the boy in the rain, emotions would not tell you to stand in the rain. You merely just experience a feeling of giddiness that the rain gives you, and a number of impulses are thrown out, based on wants. If the rain feels good at the time, it means you are satisfying a want from one of your numerous instincts. But if, as it always happens, you begin to say, this feels good, so I will stay here, you are therefore giving yourself a "reason" to stay, because it feels good to you. And that is your logical constituents coming though.
So look at this: at first it feels good, so you stand, due to impulse. But then, you say "this feels good" so you stay, due to reason. Emotions don't appeal or tell you anything, emotions just command. According to Nietzsche, the instincts are tyrannical. Logic appeals, it makes premises, and if the premises clash, that is, if they are contradictory, it means something is off.
Example: "This feels bad" so you go. If you are going to stay, it would not be because it feels bad to you, but because you are curious on why it does, or some other concern. And if in some way you find out that it is actually bad, it wouldn't be due to emotions, but due to rationality or empiricism. If it is not bad, then there must be a reason it isn't.
And on your other example: "Take loss aversion, for example. You’re more afraid of losing $20 than you are excited about gaining $20. Logically, it’s the same amount of money, but emotionally, the two scenarios couldn’t be more different." Empirically it is the same amount, but on further dissection with logic, you should find out that the reason one is sad when they lose 20 dollars, but do not get excited when they gain it, is because people just don't like loss and losing as much as they love gaining, most times, as a result of gaining being seen as deserving, and losing as undeserving.
Thank you for this. You've said it all.
Hi, Sini dear.
When Nietzsche says "the instincts are tyrannical", does he refer to instincts as in intuition, or instincts in relation to emotions, or what most would wrongly describe as "gut feeling"? Because, as I have said, we are spiritual beings before we are physical. Gut feeling is not an emotion. The instincts are not either, and they should be listened to most times because that component of our humanity does not lie to our physical vessels.
Suya and mayonnaise?
That’s it Seto, You’re done! And I’ll never forgive you for saying this on a public platform!
Hear me out