• zout@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    2 months ago

    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…

      • zout@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        2 months ago

        I am indeed, because the one with the capital R is more fringe to me, and there is no context pointing to that one.

        • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          The context is that the meme is making fun of it, which makes no sense for the epistemological version.

          • jaycifer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            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.

            • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              plenty of modern philosophers. If you think philosophy is only about historical old men, that’s on you.

                • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  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?

              • jaycifer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                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.

  • remer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 months ago

    “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.

  • crt0o@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      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?

      • zo0@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 months ago

        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!

        • frankPodmore@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          2 months ago

          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.

        • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Sadly, not only it exists, but it’s the philosophical underpinning behind the current Fascist takeover of the USA.

          • crt0o@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            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

      • CrayonRosary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.

  • chuso@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    Isn’t one of the main rationalist blogs named LessWrong? I mean, it’s almost like the meme itself.

  • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    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.