We had a problem in differential equations that attempted to describe a formula for the 'tendency'of love between Romoe and Juliet. The property used being the increasing and decreasing quality of liking and how it was associated to that of the latter's likes. I was amused then; it was added spice for an otherwise altogether dry topic (I take full responsibility for that statement/opinion).
It’s not totally amusing on reflection; it seems to be part of something bigger-our latest obsession with reason. It is easier now to understand how the books like-'why men and women think differently', seem to be bestsellers everywhere. It makes life simpler to know why, once again a concrete hypothetical support to base our life on. We are ready to dismember emotions, to dissect humanity (or the lack of it) we won't stop until it all fits into a clear logical whole. We pursue reason beyond reason at times.
Not to be judgmental of our scientific tendencies, I only wish to be wary of where to stop trying to reason. Perhaps this is not entirely our fault; the economic system supports our reason for reasoning. When profit maximized is the important driving force there is little room for humanitarian or social obligations. What is more alarming is the fact that individual needs are being homogeneous in our drive to satisfy the order of capitalism. At some level the emphasis on individual has narrowed down so much that we are losing focus We are perhaps forgetting the fact that individuals are not separate of the social whole, more importantly they retain their set of emotions and feelings irrespective of the environment they are put in. Individualism and socialism are and will always be complementary. In a way socialism and democracy are but imperative for the existence of each other. But we don't have to wait for society to take it up; we can start a step closer to home. How do we act? Are we entirely logical all the time? If not why should there be a reasonable way through everything? In a world that is bizarre in its composition and dynamism how can things be run purely by reason?
Easier said than done, I tried imagining this axiom enacted in real life. I realized that problems arise when we forget the non existence of any axioms in the first place. These words I am writing now make no sense unless they make you feel the need to know why I write them; you can forget the words and not follow a word of my argument. But if you are wondering why you are still reading them, you have taken the step I was talking about.