Adventures in Thought Space

  The following is the second edition of  The Epistemology of Irrationality , which has been removed. The two articles are very similar, but the current is longer, posits more signs of irrationality, and has additional theses.       The pinnacle of irrationality is the idea that a person could ever be fully rational. Thus, it could be said that a definition of irrationality is the failure to ask, “Am I irrational?”    Rationality, to whatever degree a human can possess it, is largely the ability to learn from mistakes and misconceptions (and/or success at doing so). This includes those of other people. All misconceptions should be considered irrational traits, however common or trivial. A person’s biology plays a major role in how they reason, and some people will manifest characteristic traits early. But in the end, no three- or four-year-old is rational; they gain rationality because they LEARN. To learn, one must ask the question—is this irrati...

  The following is a postscript to the ER intros, especially the three-part original  ( recent summary version ). Although this is a self-contained article, reading one is strongly recommended, for ER theory explains The Sham and extralogical reasoning’s futility.      If ER ever gains popular recognition, it will be evidence AGAINST its correctness. This essay will show this and, in doing so, offer a prognosis for humankind.    A piece of writing always says much more about the author than even their most devout reader--and there’s no better example of this than ER (especially since it has none).   Many readers will/would overestimate how much they agree with extralogical reasoning. They may agree enough that they aren’t guilty of hypocrisy--but ONLY just enough. Conscious beliefs unsupported by unconscious beliefs and emotions have little effect on people’s actions and general perspectives, however well-understood. Even when conscious beliefs un...