Aristotle and Freud

When I told an astrologer friend that I was reading Aristotle, he told me t=
hat Aristotle started the meanness that has been ongoing in the Western civ=
ilization. The confusion there is one between the value and the misuses of =
the value. Aristotle invented a system of logic. Logic is not a bad thing a=
t all. It becomes bad when it gets misused to commit emotional violence.

In fact, many of the people who use logic that way can be easily shown to b=
e illogical. We see this for example with Freudians. These people think tha=
t children are in love with the parent of the opposite gender, and that lov=
e in adulthood is transference of these feelings. This can be logically sho=
wn to be wrong. At the time of Freud there were few single-parent household=
s and homosexuals to study; now there are plenty of them. And what we find =
again and again, is that women raised by single mothers, men raised by sing=
le fathers, homosexuals raised by the parent of opposite gender, and people=
 raised without either parent, fall in love just as readily as do the peopl=
e who are raised in nuclear families.

Since these people don=E2=80=99t have a transference figure, their feelings=
 cannot be transference.

Finally, since the feelings developed by people raised in the nuclear famil=
ies are of the same character as theirs, their feelings cannot be transfere=
nce either.

So we have people thinking that romantic love is irrational. I have known h=
ighly rational people =E2=80=93 including scientists, teachers, inventors a=
nd military personnel =E2=80=93 who started their matches with romantic lov=
e and are still going strong when they are in their 90s. These people are f=
ar more rational and responsible than people who militate against love. And=
 it is they that should be setting the tone for man-woman relationships.

When I was writing about my spiritual experiences, people were claiming me =
to be illogical. That is wrong. I have had experiences with less than a bil=
lionth chance of happening whose only possible explanations are spiritual. =
I would have to be completely psychotic to deny these experiences. When fac=
ed with an experience that contradicts the worldview, the logical thing to =
do is not to deny the experience but to correct the worldview.

So we have people claiming that one must live =E2=80=9Con Earth.=E2=80=9D T=
hese people have an inadequate view of what is Earth. The Earth is not just=
 its crust. It is also the molten metal in the center, the oceans and atmos=
phere at the top, and all the life that lives on it. The people who see onl=
y the crust do ignorant things. And it sometimes takes a reasoned argument =
from a perspective that they haven=E2=80=99t considered to correct their er=
rors.

I am not against logic, and I am not against science. Both are important pu=
rsuits, and a lot is owed to both. I am however against bigotry, whether it=
 is done in the name of religion or in the name of logic. The people who th=
ink such things as that romantic love or spiritual experience are irrationa=
l are not being logical, they are being bigoted. And it then takes a strong=
ly reasoned argument, that they cannot claim to be illogical, to correct th=
eir errors.

Logic is a useful tool, and I highly recommend that people learn how to use=
 it correctly. What I do not recommend is that it be used to attack such th=
ings as romantic love and spiritual experience. Misuses of the value discre=
dit the value itself. This then feeds irrational ideologies. And the person=
 who truly respects logic will respect it enough not to use it to do wrong =
things.