OTF Thinking Thread
Sort:
Nov 14, 2025
0
#162
Here’s a weird question: do humans ever actually think rationally? We are constantly making biases, unconscious or not, and most of our decisions are driven by emotion
Nov 14, 2025
0
#163
#164 depends on the school probably. Some schools don’t force anything onto students, while others teach À-Level Latin courses in year 4.
PointlessR wrote:
Here’s a weird question: do humans ever actually think rationally? We are constantly making biases, unconscious or not, and most of our decisions are driven by emotion
The term 'rational thinking' was created by humans, so I'd have to say no.
Nov 14, 2025
0
#165
Well we also created the terms ‘maths’ and ‘gravity’ but these are all accepted principles. Why not rational thinking?
#168 "maths" and "gravity" are all objective principles. Rationality, however, is a subjective concept. a rational choice for one person may seem entirely ridiculous to another.
#166 my school is rated as one of the best in Texas, and it sucks. So… idk what that says about the other schools.
(My school is actually amazing, cause it offers AP courses etc… I’m taking some more advanced classes this year and it’s great, but freshman year I took everything on level except for advanced algebra, and oh my gosh it was so bad. I had to teach myself biology and world geography cause the coaches didn’t know anything.)
(My school is actually amazing, cause it offers AP courses etc… I’m taking some more advanced classes this year and it’s great, but freshman year I took everything on level except for advanced algebra, and oh my gosh it was so bad. I had to teach myself biology and world geography cause the coaches didn’t know anything.)
Nov 14, 2025
0
#168
Well no, because rationality has objective standards like logic without contradiction, and coherence. The reason rational seems subjective is because we apply it differently.
For example if someone wanted good health eating a cake would be irrational. However if someone wanted to eat sweets it would be rational to eat a cake. It depends on goals, but that doesn’t change how it relies on objective principles.
For example if someone wanted good health eating a cake would be irrational. However if someone wanted to eat sweets it would be rational to eat a cake. It depends on goals, but that doesn’t change how it relies on objective principles.
Nov 14, 2025
0
#169
#170 of course I hardly understand what you are talking about because I know nothing about American schooling, but from your text I assume in your last year you had it harder because you took too many subjects?
No, last year was bad because it wasn’t nearly challenging enough or worth my time. I didn’t learn anything from the classroom, and any intellectual benefit I managed to glean from freshman year was from my own research on things like biology and geography.
#171 Does it really exclusively rely on objective principles? what if someone was misinformed, and making decisions based on the information that turns out to be false. Would those decisions be rational, because they trusted the concepts that were believed among the common people, or irrational, because said person was following information that did not turn out to be the truth?
Nov 14, 2025
0
#172
173# Oh right. I’m very glad I don’t have that problem. If you had your freshman year last year then that puts you in y11 in the UK.
Nov 14, 2025
0
#173
Well when the cake is gone it no longer exists, nothing exists except what is existing
Nov 14, 2025
0
#174
#174, no because if you were misinformed then it wouldn’t be rational, because it might be argued one of the objective principles is having good evidence. You didn’t have good evidence, you weren’t rational
PointlessR wrote:
Well we also created the terms ‘maths’ and ‘gravity’ but these are all accepted principles. Why not rational thinking?
Gravity and maths were more discoveries than principles. The creation of rational thinking relies completely in the trust of 'rational' or 'smart' people, which are just terms we as a human species created for ourselves.
So it would be more rational to go against the commonly accepted principle among the general public? Without knowing the information is false, (like said person), that woulf be a very irrational choice.
I'm not saying we should go against this principle; I'm saying that the terms we created, like 'rational thinking,' vary from person to person.
Nov 14, 2025
0
#179
#178, except just like maths rationality has objective patterns. Hence we discovered these patterns and named them.
For example, in maths À=B, B=C so À=C. The same is so in rationality, since it is logic, an objective pattern found in maths and rational.
For example, in maths À=B, B=C so À=C. The same is so in rationality, since it is logic, an objective pattern found in maths and rational.
Nov 14, 2025
0
#180
179# yes you should go against majority if the majority doesn’t align with evidence.
John Snow was able to prove that cholera spread through contaminated water despite the common belief in ‘miasma’ at the time.
Even now, there are examples of this. ‘more expensive products are better’ is often accepted in our world and while it is sometime true, it isn’t always so isn’t based in evidence making it irrational. You should disagree with it if you consider yourself rational.
John Snow was able to prove that cholera spread through contaminated water despite the common belief in ‘miasma’ at the time.
Even now, there are examples of this. ‘more expensive products are better’ is often accepted in our world and while it is sometime true, it isn’t always so isn’t based in evidence making it irrational. You should disagree with it if you consider yourself rational.
Prove me wrong
*sips coffee*