Scrameustache's Journal: This entry has no awnsers, only questions.

Main Entry: irrational
Pronunciation: i-'ra-sh(&-)n&l, "i(r)-
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin irrationalis, from in- + rationalis rational
: not rational: as a (1) : not endowed with reason or understanding (2) : lacking usual or normal mental clarity or coherence b : not governed by or according to reason

Where there's no emotion, there's no motive for violence. -- Spock, "Dagger of the Mind", stardate 2715.1

We are all irrational.

From time to time, our emotions take over and our reason takes a step back. Anger, fear, pride, or any of the host of emotions we experience might override reason and make us behave in reprehensible ways.

But does it have to be this way?
If our understanding of our squishy bits was more advanced, and we could take away emotions to let reason reign, should we do it?
Would it be something that would make us better, usher in a true age of reason? Or would it be a bane, reducing us to logical automatons?

Is fun worth all the suffering that comes with it? Is the human condition so noble, or are we fooling ourselves because we can't bare the horror that a different truth would bring?

If we could create a person without emotions, a true Man of reason, would it be unethical to do so, or would it be irrational not to?

fun is worth all the suffering but

[NeMon'ess]

Not feeling any emotion, a person wouldn't quite comprehend what they're missing.

The truly poor in other countries who don't know how the wealthy in the USA live, should not be told just to make them miserable.

The poor Catholics are told their reward will come in the next life. It keeps them going in this one. They should still fight for rights, better jobs, and so on, though.

I think the highest accomplishment humanity can make is to understand the universe. Understand the origin of the universe, and

Re:fun is worth all the suffering but

[Scrameustache]

I'm so far thinking it would be irrational not to create such a being without emotions, but only if they did not feel pain. Pain seems too linked to emotion.

Without emotion there would be no purely emotional pain, obviously, but physical pain is still necessary (and different) to prevent injuries and their consequences.

Of course, then we get into the metaphysicals of pain/pleasure and emotions: If a person can percieve pain, would they not also know pleasure? Or would absence of pain suffice?

Silly questions

[Profane MuthaFucka]

Without emotions, why would anybody do anything?