Afaik rationalism was named so by other people; i.e. the first classical rationalist was Descartes, but his death pre-dates the first use of the term rationalism. Objectivism is a whole different story…
you’re thinking about rationalism instead of Rationalism.
I am indeed, because the one with the capital R is more fringe to me, and there is no context pointing to that one.
The context is that the meme is making fun of it, which makes no sense for the epistemological version.
The further context is that you posted this in the Philosophy community, which draws my mind more toward historical thinkers than modern groups that use “rational” to sound smart.
plenty of modern philosophers. If you think philosophy is only about historical old men, that’s on you.
You’ve argued this with at least two people, I think the confusion can be forgiven.
I can excuse the confusion, but I don’t get why people are defensive about it. is their self-worth tied to how well they identify philosophy schools?
Yeah, I had a few modern philosophers as professors in college when I minored in it. Based on a glimpse at the wikipedia article you shared, I’m hesitant to call these modern rationalists philosophers. Sophists sounds more appropriate.
I just thought there was some additional context that you missed which would explain the confusion some people are having. I will easily admit that it is my fault for thinking of historic philosophers whose ideas are still discussed today before a fringe group from Silicon Valley that uses the same terminology.
Difficult to see Ayn Rand seriously
“Rationalism” is that weird cult-like movement that spun off the zizian cult. The Behind the Bastards podcast had a few episodes on the zizian and rationalism groups.
Other way around Zizz comes from the Rationalists.
I think rationalism is more about even being able to acquire true knowledge rationally and that rationality should be our main source of knowledge (in contrast to spiritual revelation for example, or empiricism for that fact, but that doesn’t exactly hold up well). In other words it’s an epistemological position about being right, not an outright proclamation that rationalism itself is right.
I think rationalism is more about even being able to acquire true knowledge rationally and that rationality should be our main source of knowledge
Are you talking about rationalism or Rationalism?
I never fails to make me laugh that Descartes was like “Hmm I can’t just follow faith, I need to be a rational person” And he just reached the same conclusions as before with his rationale!
So many philosophers did this! My favourite is Hegel, who ‘rationally’ reached the conclusion that German was the best language, Prussia was the best country and Protestantism was the best religion. Nothing to do with the fact that he’d been raised in German-speaking Prussian Protestantism, oh no.
Yeah, I did not know that existed…
Sadly, not only it exists, but it’s the philosophical underpinning behind the current Fascist takeover of the USA.
Huh, that’s interesting, reading the wikipedia page, it didn’t even seem that terrible, I don’t really understand how “effective altruism” and “hyper-utilitarianism” can lead you to that
Wikipedia by default tries to stay neutral. There’s plenty of articles to read about Eliezer Yudkowsky and LessWrong and his influence in Fascists and Grifters. There’s even a whole comm making fun of them: [email protected]
Easy it starts with the idea that since you are so smart and special you must have been destined to lead the nation just like your other techbros.
Why are you arbitrarily capitalizing one of them? The link you have for capital R doesn’t capitalize the name other than in the title, or at the start of sentences.
For distinction.
It’s the professorial version of choosing your own nickname.
This is a dumb take. Its like saying “math is stupid, because its just a made up system so it doesnt really prove that 1+1=2”
Some things are just factually provable and leave no space for unscientific opinions. Not everything is a philosophical question.
“Giving starving people food makes them less likely to die.” doesnt require anyones opinion. Its just fact.
If people use “rational” to mean their personal opinion, then you just disregard those people, but not the concept of rationality.
Do you realize that there’s philosophies out there called “Objectivism” and “Rationalism”? Your rebuke makes no fucking sense. You’re fighting against a strawman.
You’re trying to teach a pig to sow*.
You are mistaken as to the philosophy being discussed. This is about Rationalism as conceived of by Yudkowsky the guy who managed to convince a bunch of techbros that he’s a genius despite having no high school education.
Oh okay so people just abused a word to mean something that it doesnt and it caught on. Wonderful.
Yeah, the guy who coined it has nothing past 8th grade so it is yet again a poorly educated IAmVerySmart type with racist notions leading the right like Limbaugh before him.
