Indeed. This is why it often seems like anything built up rationally can be tore down rationally.
This leads some to the interesting (and perhaps terrifying) conclusion that narratives are more important and useful than rationalism. Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_de_Maistre
“ According to Maistre, any attempt to justify government on rational grounds will only lead to unresolvable arguments about the legitimacy and expediency of any existing government and that this in turn will lead to violence and chaos.[23][24] As a result, Maistre argued that the legitimacy of government must be based on compelling, but non-rational grounds which its subjects must not be allowed to question.”
Perhaps whatever is useful is oftentimes more important than what is true.
>“ According to Maistre, any attempt to justify government on rational grounds will only lead to unresolvable arguments about the legitimacy and expediency of any existing government and that this in turn will lead to violence and chaos.[23][24] As a result, Maistre argued that the legitimacy of government must be based on compelling, but non-rational grounds which its subjects must not be allowed to question.”
>
>Perhaps whatever is useful is oftentimes more important than what is true.
There has been an ongoing debate in the UK about proportional representation and the first past the post system. It has not, as yet, lead to violence and chaos. So I think that the link Maistre identifies between questioning the status quo and chaos is not always true.
Admittedly there is time and place for debate. You don't argue about the cars direction, when the driver is trying to concentrate in a dangerous situation.
Yeah. I shared that quote as an example of the “terrifying” conclusions this good lead one to, not necessarily because I though his reactionary stance was true (or useful, haha).
But maybe the success of representative democracy is not based in rationalism but instead the mythology around individual liberty.
This leads some to the interesting (and perhaps terrifying) conclusion that narratives are more important and useful than rationalism. Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_de_Maistre
“ According to Maistre, any attempt to justify government on rational grounds will only lead to unresolvable arguments about the legitimacy and expediency of any existing government and that this in turn will lead to violence and chaos.[23][24] As a result, Maistre argued that the legitimacy of government must be based on compelling, but non-rational grounds which its subjects must not be allowed to question.”
Perhaps whatever is useful is oftentimes more important than what is true.