Skip to main content
Philosophy

Return to Question

edited tags
Link
J D
J D
  • 35.5k
  • 4
  • 30
  • 125
Post Closed as "Opinion-based" by David Gudeman, Conifold, RodolfoAP, Frank, Ted Wrigley
deleted 2 characters in body
Source Link
user62907
user62907

Emotional reasoning is considered a flawed form of reasoning because you essentially believe in something because you feel it to be true. But isn’t this the case for any question in philosophy?

For example, why do most of us believe the external world is real? I can’t think of an answer to this except the fact that it just feels obvious. But that would just be a feeling. Any other justification can be infinitely asked the question why until you arrive at certain axioms that are simply e believed?. But isn’t any axiom asserted simply because one feels it to be true?

Is all of philosophy a form of emotional reasoning?

Emotional reasoning is considered a flawed form of reasoning because you essentially believe in something because you feel it to be true. But isn’t this the case for any question in philosophy?

For example, why do most of us believe the external world is real? I can’t think of an answer to this except the fact that it just feels obvious. But that would just be a feeling. Any other justification can be infinitely asked the question why until you arrive at certain axioms that are simply e believed? But isn’t any axiom asserted simply because one feels it to be true?

Is all of philosophy a form of emotional reasoning?

Emotional reasoning is considered a flawed form of reasoning because you essentially believe in something because you feel it to be true. But isn’t this the case for any question in philosophy?

For example, why do most of us believe the external world is real? I can’t think of an answer to this except the fact that it just feels obvious. But that would just be a feeling. Any other justification can be infinitely asked the question why until you arrive at certain axioms that are simply believed. But isn’t any axiom asserted simply because one feels it to be true?

Is all of philosophy a form of emotional reasoning?

Source Link
user62907
user62907

Is philosophy any different from emotional reasoning?

Emotional reasoning is considered a flawed form of reasoning because you essentially believe in something because you feel it to be true. But isn’t this the case for any question in philosophy?

For example, why do most of us believe the external world is real? I can’t think of an answer to this except the fact that it just feels obvious. But that would just be a feeling. Any other justification can be infinitely asked the question why until you arrive at certain axioms that are simply e believed? But isn’t any axiom asserted simply because one feels it to be true?

Is all of philosophy a form of emotional reasoning?