| (Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) | |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1313 Joined: 19 Feb 2009     | |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1288 Joined: 10 Jan 2009     | Without emotion we are machines, like the Tranquils from Dragon Age..... They didn't think, cared for nothing and merely "followed procedure" like a program would. Complex logic separates us from animals but emotion separates us from true monsters. |
Muckraker Posts: 290 Joined: 3 Apr 2009     |
Actually, I disagree with this analogy for a few reasons. 1. Will is the most likely to survive on his own, ergo he should be the last person saved. Edit: what I'm trying to say is that in this case the logical choice would be the child. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1267 Joined: 24 Jul 2009   |
Hypothetically speaking, the perfect society would be like a society of robots. If you ask me, the imperfections are the only things that make this world worth living in. |
Beat Writer  Posts: 167 Joined: 6 Feb 2009    | In my opinion, logic is way better than emotion. Logic serves a purpose and achieves tangible results, whereas emotion helps peoples feelings. For example,when was the last time somebody ate feelings? or decided to trade valuable goods for their feelings of appreciation. Logic is the basis for value because if you have a logical need for something you are able to realize it and thus it has value to you. Therefore without logic nothing would be accomplished. If emotion were gone the only thing that would change is that people would be a lot more honest with each other because they would not care about offending others. Without logic we would never have advanced past the cavemen. |
Beat Writer Posts: 167 Joined: 6 Feb 2009 | Even the cavemen realized they needed shelter and used logic to provide for themselves. Their emotions were absolutely useless in such an example, and indeed in examples where a specific goal needs to be completed. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1313 Joined: 19 Feb 2009 |
I can't remember the exact percentage of chance she had of survival but it was considerably low (about 17% chance). Will would have definately survived if rescued, but he wouldn't have done unassisted. The girl was far less likely to survive even if saved. So there was a higher chance of at least one person surviving if Will was saved. This was the robot's logic. I think your points 2 and 3 are irrelevant as the robot was probably not designed to make calculations based on social impact and potential parentage. Even if it was, the ability to save at least one life according to survival chances would outweigh any future concerns. Anyway, with using the analogy I was not intending to scrutinize the robot's logic. More the extreme difference in outcome had Will Smith been able to choose who would be saved. He clearly didn't give a frak about the odds. A distinctly human and emotion driven trait... |
Beat Writer Posts: 167 Joined: 6 Feb 2009 |
Some would argue, I certainly would, that complex logic is the very act of thinking. Without emotion clouding our judgment we would care only for ourselves because that is instinctual. Therefore you are implying that it is monstrous to look out for one's best interests over everything else. I never played Dragon Age so i do not get the reference but i think that by using only logic without emotion is an even higer level of thinking, rather than an absence of it. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1288 Joined: 10 Jan 2009 |
I believe that using logic at a higher level is never bad. What I was trying to insinuate was that to forsake our emotion is to forsake our humanity. The Tranquils were cut off from their emotion and to me is a horrifying fate. They ended up caring for nothing and just doing as they were told. |
Muckraker Posts: 290 Joined: 3 Apr 2009 |
If that is the case then an ouside observer should indeed go for saving one. However, if i remember correctly, will was mad at the robot for not svaing the girl because he values himself as worthless (which is why he was in the accident... I think he was drinking? Or am i confusing this movie with 7 pounds). However, the robot didn't know that Will thought that. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1313 Joined: 19 Feb 2009 |
Even hypothetically I think the term perfect society would be extremely subjective. But I think having a globally agreed standard of morals and ethics would be a step in the right direction. Seen the film Equilibrium? It's awesome! After world war 3 it is decided that emotions would no longer be beneficial to humanity. So the law-abiding population use emotion suppressing drugs to weed out any influence of emotion. Although the film fails to really describe what this is like it serves as a potent warning to any common sense wielding person. The government were corrupt in this situation (reminicsent of Nazi Germany), It was all just about control. Higher evolved society will come when people willingly lay down weapons and stop conflict. Using control over their emotions is their greatest strength... I tell ya, the Bhuddists know their shit... |
Beat Writer  Posts: 211 Joined: 8 Sep 2009     | Logic > Emotions, no exceptions. |
Beat Writer  Posts: 147 Joined: 1 Apr 2009     |
You must be tired because human errors are from laziness, not emotions or logic. Thinking logically depends on your own personal logical insight. Someone may see robbing a store as the most "logical" thing to do; others may see it as illogical. Eye of the beholder, my friend. To add, most rapes are done for dominance and most robberies are out of desperation. Car crashes? Err not sure where you were going with that one, but whatever. OT: I'd side with emotion for the most part as things like ambition, risk taking and overcoming odds are prime examples of going outside the box of what people consider "logical". Emotion is a powerful tool that has been utilized by many humans by taking chances. Risk is deemed "illogical" but some dare to experiment anyway. Many inventors can be seen as illogical, think about it. |
Beat Writer Posts: 167 Joined: 6 Feb 2009 |
To me that does not seem so much cut off from emotion as it is cut off from free will. If they still retained their sense of logic then they would only do as they are told when that coincided with their goals in caring for themselves, so that if they were faced with a demand that caused harm to their desires then their sense of logic would tell them that they should not obey that, which i do not consider caring for yourself as an emotion as much as a biological necessity. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1313 Joined: 19 Feb 2009 |
No he was mad at robots because he survived instead of the girl and that the robot wouldn't listen to his protests... He felt worthless after the encounter. (I haven't seen Seven Pounds though.) This is evident in his survivor's guilt behaviour as well as stating it many times throughout the film. My guess is that he would say "Fuck Logic!" He might hate robots because they personify cold hard logic. This further adds to his suprise and eventual empathetic relationship with Sonny the robot.
Tell us why? |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 742 Joined: 13 Aug 2009   | True logic should take everything into account including emotion and make a decision based on all available possibilities. So basically i agree that you need both. In the example given it makes sense what the robot decided to do, he could save one so he choose the one that he was most likely to save. What Will Smiths character makes sense to when you think about it, he was a police officer and it was a child. Not only is it his profession to save people but he would have a instinctive reaction to protect the child. And it could be argued further that this instinctive reaction could be compared to emotion. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2333 Joined: 10 Oct 2008    | Both are necessary for their own reasons. A lot of morality is based off of emotion. If you aren't sure if your current philosophy is moral, then emotions could tell you if you are wrong. Sometimes logic would dictate that your action was right, but your emotions tell you it is wrong. My recommendation is that for most problems, you should use both. It's like delivering a good speech. You need emotion to draw them in, and logic to keep them. |
Beat Writer Posts: 211 Joined: 8 Sep 2009 |
Okay, I will give a brief overview of my opinion. Logic allows us to make the correct decision every time. What we consider to be the logical option is what we consider to be the correct option. Each individual has a different opinion on what is logical, so what I consider logical you may consider illogical. Therefore, while you may consider that someone chose the emotional option, they may believe they have taken the logical option. Really it comes down to this: If you have already deduced that an option is the logical choice then why would you choose the wrong choice? |
Muckraker Posts: 290 Joined: 3 Apr 2009 |
k, thanks for clearing that up. However, i still stand by my first post. IMO the logical coice was to attempt to save the girl. Will would last a while longer (at least 4 mins, in which one could at least attempt to save the child) |
Muckraker  Posts: 242 Joined: 19 Mar 2009     | attach air tanks to robots, problem solved. (oops that wasnt the question) |
Copy Clerk  Posts: 60 Joined: 22 Apr 2009   | It should be said that having good logic does not mean you will be correct. Something can be of perfectly sound logic and in reality be incorrect. So to say that logic is perfect or that to be logical is to always be right or sound in reasoning is a misconception. Naturally a emotion is somewhat necessary and so should logic be. Ultimately, the most important thing being left out of this equation is reasoning. How we use, say, logic and reasoning. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1367 Joined: 17 Apr 2009    |
yeah, a real Assimov robot would have got stuck between both the kid and the detective trying to save them both... i didnt liked the way they destroyed the philosophy on Assimovīs work, but i did enjoyed the movie taking a different aproach... an ackward and silly aproach but kudos for trying |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1313 Joined: 19 Feb 2009 |
Well I was poising the dilema to have you see the decision through Will's (the human) point of view. After all most robots don't have emotions.
The percieved - (keyword), logical solution isn't necessarily the best one. A logical solution would be the one that is percieved to be the most correct given the evidence avaliable. Otherwise you are stating that you are omni-potent and all knowing. Logic helps us choose the best solution, and emotion dictates which logic we go with. Logic doesn't make up our minds as humans and we cannot pretend otherwise. Robots however will always go with the most logical solution because it cannot percieve any other reason. And finally, humans have always defied logic in order to evolve. "don't fix what isn't broken" is a sound logical arguement. It certainly makes more sense than breaking it to try and make something better when risk is involved. |
Beat Writer Posts: 211 Joined: 8 Sep 2009 |
I understand what you are saying, yet I still disagree with you in some areas. Ah well each to their own opinion, I have mine, you have yours. |
Gone Gonzo Posts: 1313 Joined: 19 Feb 2009 |
Indeed, thanks for sharing it. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2060 Joined: 5 Jun 2009   | We need both to function. No emotion? We become cold automatons. No logic? We become Chaotic Evil demons. As many other people here said,logic works better when you have time for it. But even if you have all the time in the world,some things can't be solved by logic. For example,picking a color for some unimportant trinket can't really be done by logic. It's an emotional thing,it depends on which you like more. Besides,there's not much point in living if you have no emotions,and cannot enjoy life. |
On the Record  Posts: 6742 Joined: 10 Apr 2007  |
Not true: When you peer inside the psychopathic brain, you can literally see this absence of emotion. After being exposed to fearful facial expressions, the emotional parts of the normal human brain show increased levels of activation. So do the cortical areas which are responsible for recognizing faces. As a result, a frightened face becomes a frightening sight; we naturally internalize the feelings of others. The brains of psychopaths, however, respond to these fearful faces with utter disinterest. Their emotional areas are unperturbed, and their facial recognition system is even less interested in fearful faces than in perfectly blank stares. Their brains are literally bored by expressions of terror. This inability to generate negative emotions means that psychopaths never learn from their negative emotions. As a result, psychopaths are four times as likely as other prisoners to commit another crime after being released. For a psychopath, there is nothing inherently wrong with violence: it is just another way of getting what they want, a perfectly reasonable way to satisfy their desires. The absence of emotion makes the most basic moral concepts incomprehensible. |
Beat Writer  Posts: 136 Joined: 23 Mar 2009  | Look at history In the dark ages and witch hunts. People were killed out of fear and hate without a hint of logic but now that we use logic we use it to kill people without a hint of regret... So i think its a double edged sword that there is a fine line that emotion and logic should be balance. Regret is an emotion so people who think logic is the only way to think then you are stupid. |
Paperboy Posts: 21 Joined: 8 Oct 2009 | I believe that choices should be made on the basis of logic and reasoning. Emotions can play a part in these decisions as long as they are recognized as such. For example, you have a choice between surfing the internet or going to see your parents. Logically there is no real reason to just up and go visit your parents, but for most people this would make them happy and can be a reason to lean towards that decision. That being said you should always lay out the Pros and Cons of any situation before you decide on it so that you can sit comfortably in knowing it was a decision you thought carefully about, even if the decision ultimately lead to a negative outcome. |
Paperboy Posts: 21 Joined: 8 Oct 2009 |
Actually, there is a whole field dedicated to exchanging money to produce emotion. It's called the entertainment industry. While I agree that a life ruled purely by emotion is nonsense, we have emotion for a reason. It is a basic survival instinct which rewards us for doing something socially good, attempts to refrain us from doing something socially ill, and can provoke us into defending ourselves. While these instincts can be misconstrued to reinforce very negative actions they do help provide a very basic sense of what we should do, which can then be reinforced or refuted by logic. Edit: Sorry about the Double Post, I should have just edited this to my previous post but did not think about it at the time. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2851 Joined: 20 Jul 2008   | Logic all the way for me. |
Infamous Scribbler  Posts: 544 Joined: 8 Jul 2008  | alternative title for this thread: Kirk vs. Spock |
Copy Clerk  Posts: 115 Joined: 1 Jul 2009  | my natural instinct says to value logic over emotion...but what is this thing we call logic? is it not something we humans came up with ourselves, tainted by the very emotion we sought to escape? true objectivity is something imagined...something that doesn't even exist (as we know it). all is illusion; can anything be reality? lol, i've had wayyy too long of a day... |
Paperboy Posts: 21 Joined: 8 Oct 2009 | I have a feeling that the majority of people here are going to say that using only logic is the way to go for a couple reasons. 1) they are mostly male, and men are taught from an early age that expressing emotions are a sign of weakness, therefore logic without any emotion is the way to go. 2) they believe that liking logic is intellegence. While you can achieve intellegence by following things to their logical conclusion, simply saying that you like logic does not make you smart. 3) this is a videogame site, you're getting response from people who play and program games. Most likely they like computers, and are under the assumption that computer logic is equal to human logic so being like a computer is cool!!!1!1one! There is nothing wrong with thinking the use of logic is more important than constantly using emotion, it's when you say you like logic, and then ironically DON'T support it with reasons. |
Beat Writer  Posts: 225 Joined: 22 Aug 2009    | I would say that logic should be placed in an higher priority than emotions. Emotions are more of a power of movement in humans, a natural unremovable force. |
| (Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) | |
Reply to Thread
|
|
Not registered? Sign up for a free account! |
It would seem then, that the refining of one's logical and emotional reasoning skills could be seen as evolution in progress. It would make sense after all... The stronger your morals, the stronger your society.
Is it possible to extrapolate at this point that the perfect society would be one which every single human being agrees with the same set of morals?
It's a shame that'll never happen...
Sounds like a one-way ticket to dullsville to me... I would say have fun, but you won't.