The modern educated human is taught to reason. The encouragement is toward logic, analysis and to constantly use the incisive edge of reasoning. And so let us dive into some of the hidden biases therein and how we make assumptions and move forward throughout our lives, most times never even seeing these biases that have been built in, even within the most rational reasoning there is.
At the outset, let us see one thing that every rational human is totally incapable of analyzing or ever even considering in his scope of review. The human who is totally rational and logical can never ever hope to ponder or dissect the irrational. For the very label irrational and illogical cuts him off from any further consideration. Now this is a very real bias you know. For any reasoning rational mind should always consider all possibilities, within a universe of infinite possibilities, would it not, by the very nature of this universe? There is the first bias. That in itself is a whole discussion, is it not, for it separates everything art, musical, spiritual, metaphysical from the so called mainstream sciences? It puts humanity in a quandary, for it categorically denies one whole existence that we humans have, our spiritual, etheric side, labeling it as irrational, unprovable and unscientific, when in fact, the very rational human who goes about doing that, deep down knows this is not true and is merely riding upon a popular bias.
The second one, would be the bias within an assumption, that mind can know everything there is to know. That there is nothing mind cannot comprehend or the laboratory cannot produce in a repeatable experiment. First of all, the very concept of mind is a controversy even in psychology. The study of mind has been extensive and many minds have studied and documented the workings of the mind. Funny how that works is it not, mind studying the mind. And so even in that itself, the mind is limited by itself, is it not. Which is pretty logical too, if you noticed. If you are standing within a huge sphere, you are limited in your definition of defining the sphere, by the very fact that you can only describe it from within and not how it appears from the outside. Quite the same way with the mind. Doesn’t matter how sharp or intellectual a mind is, it is still limited by the its own scope and boundaries. Now there are some who would argue, that the scope is unlimited and only is ever expanding in its potential. This is how we can discover tomorrow what we could not have possibly thought about today. This is how the progress of humanity is made. That is the scope of a much larger discussion, for I will tell you, that by that very reasoning, I might ask, why could you then not have thought of yesterday, what you will think of tomorrow? You see how that might have a whole new twist of discussion right there? Yes, when the mind is presented with a scope of a new piece of knowledge and wisdom, it now has expanded to encompass that new concept and it grows to meld into it, making it within the universe of the mind now. And yet, there is always that boundary beyond which mind cannot perceive or see. And so this mysterious mind is like a sponge that always is ready to absorb anything fed to it, and yet a moment ago, that very idea was beyond the capacity of the mind to see, reason, understand and assimilate. So the mind therefore, cannot grow by itself. It can only grow to encompass something that is given to it. All knowledge and wisdom, is a source therefore, of something external to the mind itself. Are you getting this? And yet there is this bias within the rational human, that all is possible to be known by the mind, as if mind is the source of it all, which it obviously isnt and this became obvious here just in a paragraph of reasoning itself.
Here is another bias. Mind can understand emotion. How can it? Emotion does not originate in the mind at all. Just as the concept of mind itself has not been understood, other than a plethora of labels and terms (and psychological jargon, if I might add) is all one has today, to understand the concept of mind itself, how can you define the concept of emotion, when it is really not known where it originates, what is its potential and what is its body and scope? Yes, the mind can conceptualize and label emotions, know the implications of emotion, like the heart beating fast, the brain producing chemicals, endorphins, hormonal effects etc, but this is just studying the effects of emotion, not emotion itself. These are two different concepts that we humans live by, and yet, we try to use mind to study emotion. Don’t you find that odd? We should perhaps study emotion with the help of emotion itself, in much the same way we use mind to study the mind, now, would that not be the logical extension of it? And yet, how many schools and universities do we have currently, that would teach emotion with emotion and not with dry words and labels?? How can laughter and tears be studied in a mental university? The very thought of that is absurd isn’t it? In much the same way, as I would propose that let us get emotional and study the mind!! And yet, the bias is, and this ties to our second bias, that there is nothing that mind cannot comprehend. Do you see, the bias there.
And so I shall leave you to ponder these three and I am sure you can come up with many too, but those are at the very basic level of it all, which the rational human has built in themselves. And so what would happen if you even propose this to a proudly rational person today? They will argue with this. They will fight this. You know why? The mind never knows anything beyond it and it is the comfort zone of the mind, to be in the familiar, to be in the known. So don’t bother with that. Simply go about your life, knowing and observing these biases that are assumed, under all that so called rational thinking. The next time anyone asks you to be “reasonable and rational”, smile, know that you know better than that. Be a bit irrational. Be a bit emotional. That too, is you, you know.