Is rational thought a better survival tool than instinct or superstition?

[Cythraul]

No, i'd say there was an element of rationality to their acts. It is just a bastardised version of rationality. The acts were morally wrong, but in a mind where such things do not apply, they remain rational.

I never said there was no element of rationality in their actions.

 

[derek]

You said it was themselves and their motives and not their rationality. I read that as meaning you didnt see their actions to have any rational element.

My mistake.

 

[Cythraul]

 

[Dushan S]

I am jumping into this post midstream...



Chicken and Egg have not come together all along - esp. when related to creationism. The question of chicken and egg is a question of creationism vs. evolution:

If the chicken came first: Creationism explains our origins - God placed creatures on the earth.

If the egg came first: Darwinism explains our origins - something begat something that birthed a mutation now known as a [insert creature-type here].

***

Pardon me while I read the rest of the thread...

Well, if there is something like "Usual treatment" of this, I don't know about it, so I am just using plain logic.

If there is evolution at work, chicken as we now it today has evolved from other life forms, and egg/animal, are just two forms of chicken as living being. Actually chicken IS egg, technically. So if chicken is egg in another form than evolution and science think that they have come together, evolved.
But at the same time, if chicken is egg, from creationist point of view god has made them both in one move, no matter if god has made two chickens to mate and lay eggs, or two eggs, that later have become chickens.
Although I do understen your view at symbolic meaning of egg and of chicken, just explaining myself better


More on topic, rationality is more advanced tool but less automatic, and less functional in some situation. I don't see them polarised, but as working together. Instict is good when is checked by rational thought, but is used as a fuel for making decisions and working to achive results. Combining them in creative way is usual charasteristic of fittest and most succesful individuals.

 

[ARC150]

I suppose the first question here should be "In what ways is superstition different than reason."

Superstition: An irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome

Reason: The basis or motive for an action, decision, or conviction.

If reason is the method for constructing the relationship between ideas such that premises, structured and properly defined, lead to conclusions, then a superstition is a premise that is not structured and properly defined but nonetheless is utilized to lead to a conclusion.

 

[infoterror]

Yes, I am aware that I am framing this topic in the context of a rational argument, but it seems fitting that rational thought as a survival tool meet it's own criteria for consistency.

Depends on the quality of "rational" thought and what is defined as rational, instinct and superstition. To my mind, mythology is not superstition; instinct is intuition; and rationality includes emotion and mystical thought. But not all people have the same capacities, so some come up with complete crap and others profundity.

 

[judas69]

Is rational thought a better survival tool than instinct or superstition?

Can you think of an example where rationality would get in the way of the goal of survival?

Maybe not a good example, but perhaps a completely rational-mind might determine that it is futile to live because all things die, and all species become extinct. Thus, rationalism may actually inhibit our growth and evolution and kill us dead on the spot!