Can we say, the logical person does not care so much about worldly things but most people are not logical?

Question

This question is about life.

If we look at the current world, so many people care about money, or power, or fame, or all of the above.

However, if we do believe in reincarnation, or that we'd transform to a different form, such as energy, or thoughts, or some other higher beings, then we really have nothing to worry about and we wouldn't care about money, or power, or fame.

Now, if we don't believe in reincarnation or transformation into other higher beings, then in that case, we pass away, and nothing really matters, and there is nothing to worry about either. So we really have nothing to worry about and we wouldn't care about money, or power, or fame.

That's the logical thinking.

However, since most people still care so much about money, power, or fame, does that mean most people are simply not logical?

Answer 1

Money, power, and fame are instrumental goals toward the primary biological imperative of passing on one's genes. For those focused on the material realm, this imperative is the main driving factor. For those looking past the flesh, a different set of goals is usually sought. In both cases, however, she is being driven by motivations of one type or another. Logic is not a source of drive, but rather a way of directing one's energy in a fruitful fashion. Specifically, logic is necessary for battling the complex contingencies life throws at us.

To answer the main question, the issue is not whether a person is acting logically, but rather the direction of a person's motivation. Someone prioritising lineage is likely to care about the instruments of possession. But someone interested in higher purpose is probable to partake in the instruments of wisdom.

Answer 2

Let's suppose someone (a) believes that there is nothing after death, and (b) is driven by logic, not base instincts like greed.

Would such a person care about money, or power, and fame? One day they will die and none of that will matter. But while they live, those things might make their life better.

But suppose the logical person considers this idea: "Everything will ultimately die so nothing really matters, not even my own temporary pleasure." Well, that's an argument for not caring about money, power, and fame. But that's also an argument for not caring about anything: kindness, learning, health, creativity, love, survival, etc. If you don't care at all about anything, you could do anything or nothing and it wouldn't matter to you. But that isn't a useful philosophy.

It's more useful (and perfectly logical) to say, "Everything will ultimately die so we might as well make the best use of the time we have." And it might be easier to achieve something worthwhile with your life when you have money, power and fame...

Answer 3

If you fully pursue "logic" with a complete disregard for emotion and inherent desires (driven by biological needs), you arguably can't justify pursuing any romantic or platonic relationship with anyone, working, doing any recreational activity, eating or even moving at all. Those things are all done in service of emotion and inherent desires, just like pursuing money, power and fame is.

Also, acting logically only makes sense in the context of some goal.

• If your goal is to accrue money, but you try to achieve this by regularly going to a casino where you just lose money every time, then you seemingly wouldn't be acting logically. But wanting to accrue money in itself has nothing to do with logic (and the same goes for power and fame).

  Believing money will make you happy or satisfy some desires you have is a belief that may or may not be based on sound logical reasoning. This depends on whether or not money will actually make you happy (or, rather, on whether you have good reason to believe it will).

• If you believe in some afterlife, and your goal is to achieve a beneficial afterlife, trying to achieve this by acting in a way contrary to that wouldn't be very logical (threatening priests in order to get into heaven probably wouldn't be very logical).

Note my use of "trying to achieve this by". You can have the goal of accruing money, spend all your money at a casino and still not be illogical (and the same goes for acting in ways that won't get you into the afterlife). Just because you have some goal doesn't mean it's illogical to do anything that's contrary to that goal. You can have different goals at the same time, and act in ways that furthers some goals but sets you back with respect to other goals.

The only criterion to act logically is to have a reasonable expectation of the outcomes of your actions, based on your experience.

It just arguably wouldn't be very rational to have a goal that's important to you while not acting to further that goal.

Answer 4

After giving it more thoughts, I think I have a simple but plausible answer:

They care about that because it is their short term goal.

It is often said that, right before a person dies, they become a pure or perfect person, because they don't care about any of these short term goals any more: money, power, or fame.

It is their short term goal because they need to pay all the bills, or buy that house that is $12 million when his manager or director bought one for $18 million. Or they just got bullied so badly that they want more power, so that they can bully some people back. It is all short term.

So it is no different from a person who can throw some ball into a nest or hit some ball with a bat and make millions of dollars and therefore decide to go on with his life throwing some ball or hitting some ball for the rest of his life.

Or somebody who takes some drugs because there is some instant gratification.

Because even if the long term goal isn't pointing at that, the short term goal is, and that's all they care.

I recalled there is a rule out of the 10 Principles of Economics by Gregory Mankiw from Harvard:

Rational people think at the margin

(although I don't know if it is really "rational". I think if it is "short-sighted people think at the margin", that makes more sense).

It talks about if they find hitting a tennis ball can make them 10 million dollars, they will just skip school and dedicate his life at tennis because "that's the thinking right at the margin".