Discuss the wiki-tag on this page. Here is the place to ask questions and propose changes.
Talk:Costs of Rationality
The tone of this page seems overly dramatic: "Be sure that you really want to know the truth before you commit to finding it; otherwise, you may flinch from it."
What is worse:
flinching from the truth initially but eventually embracing it.
Flinching form the truth and never embracing it.
Never finding the truth so there was never something to flinch from.
What purpose does this quote serve other then:
Scare people way.
be a self aggrandizing statement.
The purpose is in honest communication of consequences of finding out the truth. If people should be scared, it's right and proper to scare them. It's not clear what is worse among the options you've listed, at least a priori. You only know what is worse (under given assumptions) by actually asking the question and attempting to answer it. After you answer the question, you can skip asking it again, but not before. This page is about that question. --Vladimir Nesov 22:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Agreed with above^
This post is literally almost pointless to me. Before I criticize any post, I find it very important to understand the other person's point of view. That being said: I greatly understand where you are coming from. People should absolutely be sure that they indeed want to find out what is real truth before they investigate, as the information they gather may conflict with previous beliefs, regarding both spiritual and moral.
However, our job here is to encourage the process of facilitating the mindset to accurately create a logical and rational decision or belief. For this to happen, we need truth. Truth is a difficult subject, and one that, because of the last sentence in the paragraph above, must be approached with an open mind. If one goes in with a hard heart, and is solely looking for ways to prove people wrong in their search of truth, they will probably be disappointed, because truth takes no side. Truth is it's own side, and doesn't bother around with pissy little trivial argument on the internet. All that being said, you are right in that people need to be careful. I would just request that you add a little more information regarding the PRO's and the CON's of rationality. By only giving one side of the topic, you are setting yourself up for failure. In addition, the purpose of the Wiki is to give information. One to two sentences are simply nowhere near enough to explain your purpose in adding this topic.
I like the topic; don't get me wrong, but I feel the way it's being presented is sententious and lacking of any useful information. If you like, I would gladly fill in the gaps here, as just sitting here, I've expounded many ideas of things to include in this article. But, out of respect for you, and an attempt to ensure you know why I'm doing it, I'l give you a few days before I put a little more info up for you to edit however you like.