B-Sides

A debate about which I have never understood much is that between those who are proponents of logic, and those who espouse emotion. Generally speaking, women have made the case for emotion to me as a valid tool of rhetoric and argument. I definitely find merit in the idea, but haven't really given much thought to the idea as I have, until now, mostly dismissed the idea. Let's explore the concepts and origins behind both ideas and try to draw some conclusions.

Logic is the foundation of modern thought. Classical western thought, pioneered by a bunch of famous Greek guys, revolves around the idea of logic as the means by which we can find meaning in this world. If one's argument doesn't follow logically, it is deemed to be invalid and worthless. Classical thought further separates things and ideas into categories to make them easier to understand and classify accordingly for our own purposes. Whether or not this entire method of though has practical backing in reality, the method is sound. We can see clearly how if one condition is true, another must also be true and vice versa. Logic also has a sort of quasi-religious status under this theory, denoting man as the "rational animal." We are not animals like dogs and cats because we have the ability to reason. Without any logic or reason, we would live in chaos and society would simply not exist.

Emotion as a tool of rhetoric, has been largely discredited by those who have held power historically. It has been demonized as a method by which one can manipulate the hearts of susceptible individuals. It is the best friend of cult leaders and propagandists alike, for its ability to sway the minds of those who believe with only their hearts without taking reality into proper consideration. However, because emotion has been abused and looked down upon, does not make it an invalid or useless tool. Indeed, I would argue that without emotion, life would hardly be worth living. The reason for which we need logic beyond mere survival is deeply rooted in emotion. We, as children, use our emotions as excuses for our actions without a second though. But when is emotion a valid argument for why, and when is it something that works against us? Emotion is a product of our primitive mind and often complex, confusing, and seemingly random. Any one event or stimulus can produce a wide array of emotions from different people. Does that make emotion any less valid of a thing? Should we second-guess all feelings before we act upon them? The answer seems to be "it depends."

The most beautiful irony of emotion and its analysis is that attempting to cut it into pieces and categories so that we can dissect and understand it the way classical thought would have us do leads only to frustration. If logic is digital, emotion is surely analog. While it makes the world a harder place to live in, not all matters can be boiled down to a few lines that dictate risk, behavior, and consequences. It's an interesting critique of our society to note that we have collectively decided that it is more important to fit all matters into "yes/no" questions rather than attempt to take them case by case. This is largely, I believe, for efficiency. The reason I'm delving into society is because for me (and I suspect anyone else reading this), your entire way of thinking and frame of reference is shaped by our society. Can you imagine living in a society that has no rules written down anywhere? Perhaps a society that doesn't differentiate between scholastic subjects? The only real difference between math, science, art, literature, and music is that we slapped different names on them and invented different ways of thinking about them. In reality, they're all related and intertwined. Scholars know this, and it's the reason for which you were forced to get a "well rounded" education.

What I find fascinating is that delving into emotion as a valid means of argument has led me to the entire foundation of our society. It seems unimaginable to think that our society has so wholeheartedly rejected such an obviously valid method of perception. I believe that there can be marriage between both methods of thinking, and that while some things are best thought out, ignoring our emotions and the reasons for which we find life sacred would be a huge mistake.