Q&A: According to What Do We Choose Values?
According to What Do We Choose Values?
Question
Good evening, Rabbi.
A question that has interested me for a long time is: how can one arrive at certain values or starting points that steer you toward a particular goal?
For example, it seems that this often comes from a strong intuition, and it’s not so clear why a rationalist—who in many cases would see something that comes from emotion as less important, or even as an abomination—begins all meanings and purposes in life from intuition.
It’s clear that such a point of view leads you to a kind of nihilism, but you also can’t dismiss it just because it is nihilistic, since that itself is only because you “feel” that nihilism is bad.
So briefly, I’ll return to the main question: what is the course by which you arrive at goals, or why should one assume there are such things at all? (Yes, logic says that everything has a purpose, but a person also does logical things because he feels that what is not logical is “base”; in the end, that too stems from a certain emotion.)
Answer
You are conflating emotion and intuition. These are two completely different things. Intuition is part of the intellect. How do you arrive at your basic assumptions? You have no proof. On the other hand, if you say that every basic assumption is emotion, then proofs are also worth nothing, since every proof is built on basic assumptions.
The identification of intuition with emotion comes from the view that if there is no proof or justification, then it is subjective emotion. But as I said, according to that, everything is subjective emotion (since every proof is built on assumptions, and therefore there is no proof for them, so they are emotion).
Therefore there are only two possibilities: to be a total skeptic and accept no claim at all (everything is emotion), or to understand that assumptions are not emotion but intuition.
Discussion on Answer
There is no mathematical criterion here. You need to examine yourself—whether this is emotion or intuition—and try to compare different sides and angles and cross-check information.
It is always possible that we act from emotional motives, but that is true in science too and in every other field. If you are worried about that, you necessarily become a total skeptic. But if you are a skeptic, there is no way to answer you.
In my opinion, what one should do is examine as much as possible that it is intuition and not emotion, and from that point on assume that this is the truth until proven otherwise. You need to understand that there is no certainty in the world, but not every lack of certainty is doubt. There is uncertainty of a few percent, and there is doubt that is 50-50.
I’ve devoted whole books to this, if it interests you. The entire analytic-synthetic quartet basically revolves around this, but especially Two Carts and Unstable Truth.
So if I can’t distinguish between emotion and intuition, then everything is meaningless?
Isn’t it possible to acquire this ability?
I didn’t understand the question. Even if I answer you, you can raise doubts about my answer. What do you want me to say?
Intuition is emotion. And that is a fact. And it has nothing to do with skepticism.
Human basic assumptions are emotion, and that is the situation.
You cannot overcome this by distorting reality, as you knowingly do.
“According to this, everything is subjective emotion” is a description of a fact. Intuition says so.
So how do I know how to distinguish between them? After all, it’s possible that people determine assumptions based on emotional motives, no?