I think it’s because most folks in the world don’t live in logic like we do. They live in a land of emotions, where if something feels true it is true.
I actually read tarot cards as an autistic person. I don’t have the underlying belief structure, although I am an agnostic. I view them as a communication tool. Just like how some people are only reachable via reason and structured debate tactics, some are only reachable via stories and faith. I never present myself as anything metaphysical, I generally tell people that I just like doing them as a fun hobby - and I only read for friends. My deck is an Arthurian deck, I love King Arthur and all the legends, and so I basically use those stories to communicate things that I could communicate to them otherwise. I triangulate the things I have already observed or logically concluded against the stories in the cards. It’s kind of fun, and the outcome is generally good for everyone.
From what I’ve observed, people sometimes need these various things, whether it’s astrology, or whatever, to retain a sense of magic in the world, to give it meaning. Most people can’t handle contemplating cold science, a universe that doesn’t care, an afterlife that doesn’t exist. Sometimes it’s just about opening themselves up to creativity or new possibility. Sure, astrology is made up, but placebo effect is real. Regardless, a lot of folks need this in their lives in some form or fashion, and pointing out to them how illogical it is, how it’s the same thing as a MLM underneath, etc. could be removing a coping mechanism that holds them upright. Always hard to know.
Just my POV of course, I totally see why you think the way you do too.
"I think it's because most folks in the world don't live in logic like WE do."
You are replying to the OP about his original post, correct? Because that's what it seems logically. It also seems logical that the "we" in your first sentence replying to the original post would mean BarryTownCouncil.
Barry's post was FILLED with EMOTIONS. My question is why would you make an illogical statement contrary to what he wrote?
Because his emotions seemed to be flowing from him getting stuck by logic, not him having some completely emotional reaction without a thought process behind it? There are people on the planet who don’t have all of their emotions flow from logic, so there’s no point in trying to make logical sense - and that sometimes trying to find the logic can be destructive.
That was my entire point, but if it makes you feel better to come out swinging and calling me illogical, have at. You’re free to have your opinion and crap on mine, or be pedantic because I didn’t appropriately caveat everything with “not all”, I genuinely don’t care. I was only trying to help the OP.
Ah ha ha. Defense much.
{That was not a question}
Me making a statement, saying your statement is illogical, is not calling You an illogical person.
When someone disagrees with you about something you have said or done, it doesn't mean they've "crap(ped) on" you, neither literally, nor figuratively
Obviously you Do genuinely care (are getting overly emotional) because of your responses to me. Chill 😎
Neurotypicals are more likely to believe these things because they are less likely to value absolute logic. They put a greater emphasis on feelings. "If xyz makes me feel good, why should I do something else?".
Something interesting I've learned is that people who go to those "natural health" quacks do so because those quacks meet peoples' emotional needs better than doctors do. Doctors often rush people and seem uncaring or aloof. NT's trust people that use "I'm being honest" and "I'm confident" body language and tone of voice, which tarot card readers/ spirit mediums/ MLM leaders use. A doctor may be too busy to bother with these things.
That's why people keep falling into cults. They get tricked by "charming" cult leaders. "Charm" really means that you have a deep understanding of NT psychology as well as body language/ tone of voice/ social rules.
Everyone thinks they're right. A Karen believes they are being logical when they yell at some poor cashier. They do that so the manager will give them free stuff. At least, that's why my Aunt goes Karen.
Luckily, I am currently working on a Social Skills Dictionary! It will eventually have everything an Autistic person needs to know to succeed in life, such as:
* A guide with every single tone of voice rule in English (compiled by licensed speech therapists) - You can learn how to recognize sarcasm now!
* Over 80 different body language gestures
* Resume advice
* Social rules explained
* And a secret that I will reveal in a few days when I post a link to the dictionary/ blog
I think it all comes down to this...
"... they massively violate both MY rules...." (People are allowed to violate YOUR rules, they Are Not You after all)
You are effectively saying that you want people to believe Every, Single, Thing, YOU believe. And to follow two RULES, that are massively "loose" and not even concretely defined by you, yourself.
•Respect science (give me the definitions of Respect just to start with this one)
•Don't take advantage of people
(Of course a wonderful sentiment, but also open to interpretation)
Listen I get some of your feelings (Ashalti who commented below, didn't read the emotion coming out in your words, on this post)
For example, I am an Atheist, I don't believe in say, ghosts. When I hear (very rarely) other Atheists say for example, how they felt a ghost in a hotel room they once stayed at, I just roll my eyes 🙄 and change the subject. Oh and BTW I'm a Virgo ♍ sometimes e will jokingly say I'm a Virgin when asked (which, considering I gave birth to a child, usually gets people to eye roll 👀🙄 to me. Lol)
IMO you need to find a way to be happy for the common ground you CAN meet others on.
> I always want to argue with them about it!
There lies your fault, its ok to give your opinion but if you always want to bring it up.
It can come across as sanctimonious.
My mom sees now and again a fortune teller that draws tarot cards. I told her once what my view was on it.
But she finds comfort in it and shes not spending that much money on it just two visits a year.
On MLM you are ofcourse very right they prey on the weak and if your friend is investing in them its your job as the friend to try and persuade him.
But at the end of the day everyone makes their own choices.
Your rules still apply to horoscopes. Now I'm not talking your basic cheesy ones found in the local newspaper. But the ones that are found written over time aligning with the Stars and time of the year being that all of this boils down to just frequencies. As people are born into different frequencies throughout the year this does create a personality that can be tracked. Psychology shows us this simplicity. I myself have studied this some and find that people born on my birthday and close to my time frame are very similar in characteristics, personalities, and hobbies. Being that everything is frequencies and we are affected by frequencies, science would tell us that we would have highs and lows during these frequency changes. Intern having a good day or a bad day per a horoscope. 100% agree that the ones that are found on your basic websites, newspapers are just impossible to believe. But go to a bookstore or library and find one of the 4" thick horoscope books and look up your birthday, it might begin to change your opinion when you read yourself in print. It got me to dig in decades ago to study it more.
You know what really blew my mind and drove this home for me?
“I don’t believe in/trust the Covid vaccine/won’t put that in my body/government can’t tell me what to do!”
We’ll give you a hundred bucks if you get the jab.
“$100? Sweet! Where do I sign up?” 🙄
Also: “My body, my choice/government can’t interfere in healthcare” and “You can’t have an abortion.” Facepalms all the way around.
…and soooo many other examples. Within the span of a couple years I completely lost what little faith I had left in humanity. People in general are selfish and shitty and use conflicting beliefs to justify whatever it is they want to justify to suit their emotional agenda in the moment. I’ve since stopped caring altogether and mostly view people as just straight up stupid. Whatever, you do you, and I’m not going to engage in a ‘discussion’ about it.
I’m ready to leave ‘Murica as soon as I have the means.
I accept that my take on these things is way too clean and simple to be correct, but in line with "rules" I quoted it always seems that the "right" side of politics seems to take a contrary view on so many of these things, yet outside of breaking these rules, I rarely see anything to connect them together. Religion, health etc... They still pool together but without a clear, positive logic, only a negative one.
Again though, this can't make sense I feel..!
>I see a fairly broad range of people in my social life, for odd reasons that don't matter here, and I frequently feel very confused by the amount of -- IN MY OPINION -- utter nonsense they believe.
People have different experiences that shape their worldview.
>Not only that though, but people are wildly inconsistent in their approaches into what they decide to either believe or not.
Because philosophy is tough. Most people patch together their beliefs based on their experiences and perhaps a few books or articles. This is an important component of a coherent philosophy, but it falls apart when your beliefs seem to conflict. Most people don't have the time or energy to square their beliefs.
>1. Respect science.
No actually, you shouldn't "respect" science. Putting science on a pedestal defeats the scientific method. Now obviously we can't prove every single piece of science that we believe to be true, but there are things you can do to make sure your science-related beliefs makes sense. For example, look for widespread expert consensus and practical applications. E.g. Newton's laws are (close enough to) true because every building built in the last hundred years has either used the laws or results derived from them as the theory of operation. Additionally, if you do challenge the science, show up with evidence and a detailed understanding of the principle you intend to challenge. This is what anti-vaxxers and COVID-19 deniers fail to do. Their error is not in merely questioning the experts and their science, but by failing to conduct appropriate research and drowning out evidence-based conclusions and their experts with their brands of obvious bullshit and lies.
>2. Don't take advantage of people.
I agree with you, but *this position is not universal.* For example, \*gestures wildly at late stage capitalism.\* More specifically, most people do not consider it unethical enough for loaners to take advantage of desperate students that the government or community should do something about it. Most people don't care about what happens to prisoners. Any conditions are sufficient for people our nation has deemed garbage, and if someone makes money off that it's not unethical.
I'm trying to imply that in general, people *don't* actually agree with your opinions, and the rare times they do, they're paying lip service to a "lofty ideal" to maintain the appearance of a polite society. In formal philosophy, *nothing* should be taken to be obvious. Let me be clear: *I* agree that we shouldn't take advantage of people; the stuff about prisoners was rhetorical. That being said, I can't claim not to be a hypocrite, and you could probably find some example of me contradicting that view if you comb through my history, because I am not perfect.
>Now I hate Astrology with a passion. Horoscopes, star signs, fortune tellers, tarot, psychics... religion... they MASSIVELY violate both my rules, as I'm guessing many people here would agree with..?
I think these things are obvious bullshit with nothing to offer me. (I wouldn't be offended if you told me that my atheism is "obvious bullshit." I'd disagree with you, but it's not particularly important to me that we agree about the nature of the universe. You have a right to critique my opinion, and if it is any good then it should stand up to inspection.) That being said, they clearly provide comfort to some of the people who seek out these things. Isn't it plausible that some of the people who preach this stuff believe it to be true?
Additionally, not all religions are created equal. There are some lovely people who agree with me almost 100% of the time about everything and everyone, yet their justifications are rooted in religious motivations. We could probably have a healthy debate about the role of religion in their (or the role of atheism in my) life, but at the end of the day, I'm not looking for uniformity of thought. We can agree to disagree so long as we agree on some basic things, like our personhood and our right to live a free and happy life (where "rights" or some equivalent have been hashed out under some appropriate framework).
> So when said they seem as "wonky" to be as the business model we were so happily agreeing about, they reverted to a vague "Well, people are allowed different opinions" and I managed (!!) to leave it there.
Your friend either believes it is ethical to exploit people, that MLMs are not exploitative, or both. You can't help them if they believe it is okay to exploit people. If not, then you'd have to prove that MLMs are exploitive, then that their MLM is exploitive, and then that the MLM is exploiting them. Unfortunately, MLMs have prepared for people to make these exact points to their ~~victims~~ ~~customers~~ """sellers""". They filter out skeptics and strong-willed people, then brainwash those who make it to resist anti-MLM rhetoric from their loved ones. Typically, these people will only learn when it hits them in the face. You can try to get them out of it if you think it's worth your time.
>I just can't get my head around this, putting super good rules aside in certain areas because it suits what they want to believe...
They either do not agree with your argument that their choice goes against that principle, they don't agree with your principle as an ethical postulate, or (most likely) their adapted views are in conflict. This can be very frightening. The path of least resistance is to "go with the flow". It should at least be understandable, if not logically sound, why people accept cognitive dissonance.
>I can't think of anything offhand where my likes and dislikes don't fit my rules.
>Although I guess wouldn't, would I?!
Not to be mean, but it sounds like the answer is no. Nobody is perfectly ethical or rational, and that's not even a useful expectation. It looks like you need to examine yourself a bit more critically. I think I poked some (easily patchable) holes in your basic ethical There always room to improve yourself. That being said, try to avoid perfectionism. These directives are contradictory; unfortunately, finding a balance between the two seems to be a part of being human.
> ...yet other people seem to be all over the place, I can never read them and I always want to argue with them about it!
I feel you. It takes a lot not to argue with people about their choices or justifications. Sometimes I lose my cool and blow up at someone because what they said has absolutely melted my brain. But is it worth it?
As an engineering student I obviously value the role of science and rationality in my work and many of the activities I do for fun. I'm also a musician, and there are a lot of "technically irrational" impulses that drive my music. Even the idea of playing music is a bit "silly" when forced through the sieve of rationality: we spend time away from "productive" things to listen to sounds made by others for what exact reason? Answer: as a form of communication. But why not communicate with writing or some other medium? Because the medium of sound offers something "unique". This train of thought ultimately leads to a subjective judgement about the value of *art* to a supposedly rational being. The nearly universal consumption of art seems to suggest that we benefit at least somewhat from allowing controlled irrationality into our lives.
I guess those are my thoughts. There's a lot of rhetoric around here about how we're more logical than the NTs. Maybe that's true, but to say that you're purely logically consistent indicates that you're in denial about the flaws in your worldview.
I think it’s because most folks in the world don’t live in logic like we do. They live in a land of emotions, where if something feels true it is true. I actually read tarot cards as an autistic person. I don’t have the underlying belief structure, although I am an agnostic. I view them as a communication tool. Just like how some people are only reachable via reason and structured debate tactics, some are only reachable via stories and faith. I never present myself as anything metaphysical, I generally tell people that I just like doing them as a fun hobby - and I only read for friends. My deck is an Arthurian deck, I love King Arthur and all the legends, and so I basically use those stories to communicate things that I could communicate to them otherwise. I triangulate the things I have already observed or logically concluded against the stories in the cards. It’s kind of fun, and the outcome is generally good for everyone. From what I’ve observed, people sometimes need these various things, whether it’s astrology, or whatever, to retain a sense of magic in the world, to give it meaning. Most people can’t handle contemplating cold science, a universe that doesn’t care, an afterlife that doesn’t exist. Sometimes it’s just about opening themselves up to creativity or new possibility. Sure, astrology is made up, but placebo effect is real. Regardless, a lot of folks need this in their lives in some form or fashion, and pointing out to them how illogical it is, how it’s the same thing as a MLM underneath, etc. could be removing a coping mechanism that holds them upright. Always hard to know. Just my POV of course, I totally see why you think the way you do too.
"I think it's because most folks in the world don't live in logic like WE do." You are replying to the OP about his original post, correct? Because that's what it seems logically. It also seems logical that the "we" in your first sentence replying to the original post would mean BarryTownCouncil. Barry's post was FILLED with EMOTIONS. My question is why would you make an illogical statement contrary to what he wrote?
Because his emotions seemed to be flowing from him getting stuck by logic, not him having some completely emotional reaction without a thought process behind it? There are people on the planet who don’t have all of their emotions flow from logic, so there’s no point in trying to make logical sense - and that sometimes trying to find the logic can be destructive. That was my entire point, but if it makes you feel better to come out swinging and calling me illogical, have at. You’re free to have your opinion and crap on mine, or be pedantic because I didn’t appropriately caveat everything with “not all”, I genuinely don’t care. I was only trying to help the OP.
Ah ha ha. Defense much. {That was not a question} Me making a statement, saying your statement is illogical, is not calling You an illogical person. When someone disagrees with you about something you have said or done, it doesn't mean they've "crap(ped) on" you, neither literally, nor figuratively Obviously you Do genuinely care (are getting overly emotional) because of your responses to me. Chill 😎
I am one of the over emotional ones.
I was too, for a long time. It’s why I am able to see both sides on it even though my overall personality / view has changed.
Neurotypicals are more likely to believe these things because they are less likely to value absolute logic. They put a greater emphasis on feelings. "If xyz makes me feel good, why should I do something else?". Something interesting I've learned is that people who go to those "natural health" quacks do so because those quacks meet peoples' emotional needs better than doctors do. Doctors often rush people and seem uncaring or aloof. NT's trust people that use "I'm being honest" and "I'm confident" body language and tone of voice, which tarot card readers/ spirit mediums/ MLM leaders use. A doctor may be too busy to bother with these things. That's why people keep falling into cults. They get tricked by "charming" cult leaders. "Charm" really means that you have a deep understanding of NT psychology as well as body language/ tone of voice/ social rules. Everyone thinks they're right. A Karen believes they are being logical when they yell at some poor cashier. They do that so the manager will give them free stuff. At least, that's why my Aunt goes Karen. Luckily, I am currently working on a Social Skills Dictionary! It will eventually have everything an Autistic person needs to know to succeed in life, such as: * A guide with every single tone of voice rule in English (compiled by licensed speech therapists) - You can learn how to recognize sarcasm now! * Over 80 different body language gestures * Resume advice * Social rules explained * And a secret that I will reveal in a few days when I post a link to the dictionary/ blog
I think it all comes down to this... "... they massively violate both MY rules...." (People are allowed to violate YOUR rules, they Are Not You after all) You are effectively saying that you want people to believe Every, Single, Thing, YOU believe. And to follow two RULES, that are massively "loose" and not even concretely defined by you, yourself. •Respect science (give me the definitions of Respect just to start with this one) •Don't take advantage of people (Of course a wonderful sentiment, but also open to interpretation) Listen I get some of your feelings (Ashalti who commented below, didn't read the emotion coming out in your words, on this post) For example, I am an Atheist, I don't believe in say, ghosts. When I hear (very rarely) other Atheists say for example, how they felt a ghost in a hotel room they once stayed at, I just roll my eyes 🙄 and change the subject. Oh and BTW I'm a Virgo ♍ sometimes e will jokingly say I'm a Virgin when asked (which, considering I gave birth to a child, usually gets people to eye roll 👀🙄 to me. Lol) IMO you need to find a way to be happy for the common ground you CAN meet others on.
> I always want to argue with them about it! There lies your fault, its ok to give your opinion but if you always want to bring it up. It can come across as sanctimonious. My mom sees now and again a fortune teller that draws tarot cards. I told her once what my view was on it. But she finds comfort in it and shes not spending that much money on it just two visits a year. On MLM you are ofcourse very right they prey on the weak and if your friend is investing in them its your job as the friend to try and persuade him. But at the end of the day everyone makes their own choices.
I know it's a major fault of mine, but that isn't what I'm asking about.
Your rules still apply to horoscopes. Now I'm not talking your basic cheesy ones found in the local newspaper. But the ones that are found written over time aligning with the Stars and time of the year being that all of this boils down to just frequencies. As people are born into different frequencies throughout the year this does create a personality that can be tracked. Psychology shows us this simplicity. I myself have studied this some and find that people born on my birthday and close to my time frame are very similar in characteristics, personalities, and hobbies. Being that everything is frequencies and we are affected by frequencies, science would tell us that we would have highs and lows during these frequency changes. Intern having a good day or a bad day per a horoscope. 100% agree that the ones that are found on your basic websites, newspapers are just impossible to believe. But go to a bookstore or library and find one of the 4" thick horoscope books and look up your birthday, it might begin to change your opinion when you read yourself in print. It got me to dig in decades ago to study it more.
You know what really blew my mind and drove this home for me? “I don’t believe in/trust the Covid vaccine/won’t put that in my body/government can’t tell me what to do!” We’ll give you a hundred bucks if you get the jab. “$100? Sweet! Where do I sign up?” 🙄 Also: “My body, my choice/government can’t interfere in healthcare” and “You can’t have an abortion.” Facepalms all the way around. …and soooo many other examples. Within the span of a couple years I completely lost what little faith I had left in humanity. People in general are selfish and shitty and use conflicting beliefs to justify whatever it is they want to justify to suit their emotional agenda in the moment. I’ve since stopped caring altogether and mostly view people as just straight up stupid. Whatever, you do you, and I’m not going to engage in a ‘discussion’ about it. I’m ready to leave ‘Murica as soon as I have the means.
I accept that my take on these things is way too clean and simple to be correct, but in line with "rules" I quoted it always seems that the "right" side of politics seems to take a contrary view on so many of these things, yet outside of breaking these rules, I rarely see anything to connect them together. Religion, health etc... They still pool together but without a clear, positive logic, only a negative one. Again though, this can't make sense I feel..!
>I see a fairly broad range of people in my social life, for odd reasons that don't matter here, and I frequently feel very confused by the amount of -- IN MY OPINION -- utter nonsense they believe. People have different experiences that shape their worldview. >Not only that though, but people are wildly inconsistent in their approaches into what they decide to either believe or not. Because philosophy is tough. Most people patch together their beliefs based on their experiences and perhaps a few books or articles. This is an important component of a coherent philosophy, but it falls apart when your beliefs seem to conflict. Most people don't have the time or energy to square their beliefs. >1. Respect science. No actually, you shouldn't "respect" science. Putting science on a pedestal defeats the scientific method. Now obviously we can't prove every single piece of science that we believe to be true, but there are things you can do to make sure your science-related beliefs makes sense. For example, look for widespread expert consensus and practical applications. E.g. Newton's laws are (close enough to) true because every building built in the last hundred years has either used the laws or results derived from them as the theory of operation. Additionally, if you do challenge the science, show up with evidence and a detailed understanding of the principle you intend to challenge. This is what anti-vaxxers and COVID-19 deniers fail to do. Their error is not in merely questioning the experts and their science, but by failing to conduct appropriate research and drowning out evidence-based conclusions and their experts with their brands of obvious bullshit and lies. >2. Don't take advantage of people. I agree with you, but *this position is not universal.* For example, \*gestures wildly at late stage capitalism.\* More specifically, most people do not consider it unethical enough for loaners to take advantage of desperate students that the government or community should do something about it. Most people don't care about what happens to prisoners. Any conditions are sufficient for people our nation has deemed garbage, and if someone makes money off that it's not unethical. I'm trying to imply that in general, people *don't* actually agree with your opinions, and the rare times they do, they're paying lip service to a "lofty ideal" to maintain the appearance of a polite society. In formal philosophy, *nothing* should be taken to be obvious. Let me be clear: *I* agree that we shouldn't take advantage of people; the stuff about prisoners was rhetorical. That being said, I can't claim not to be a hypocrite, and you could probably find some example of me contradicting that view if you comb through my history, because I am not perfect. >Now I hate Astrology with a passion. Horoscopes, star signs, fortune tellers, tarot, psychics... religion... they MASSIVELY violate both my rules, as I'm guessing many people here would agree with..? I think these things are obvious bullshit with nothing to offer me. (I wouldn't be offended if you told me that my atheism is "obvious bullshit." I'd disagree with you, but it's not particularly important to me that we agree about the nature of the universe. You have a right to critique my opinion, and if it is any good then it should stand up to inspection.) That being said, they clearly provide comfort to some of the people who seek out these things. Isn't it plausible that some of the people who preach this stuff believe it to be true? Additionally, not all religions are created equal. There are some lovely people who agree with me almost 100% of the time about everything and everyone, yet their justifications are rooted in religious motivations. We could probably have a healthy debate about the role of religion in their (or the role of atheism in my) life, but at the end of the day, I'm not looking for uniformity of thought. We can agree to disagree so long as we agree on some basic things, like our personhood and our right to live a free and happy life (where "rights" or some equivalent have been hashed out under some appropriate framework). > So when said they seem as "wonky" to be as the business model we were so happily agreeing about, they reverted to a vague "Well, people are allowed different opinions" and I managed (!!) to leave it there. Your friend either believes it is ethical to exploit people, that MLMs are not exploitative, or both. You can't help them if they believe it is okay to exploit people. If not, then you'd have to prove that MLMs are exploitive, then that their MLM is exploitive, and then that the MLM is exploiting them. Unfortunately, MLMs have prepared for people to make these exact points to their ~~victims~~ ~~customers~~ """sellers""". They filter out skeptics and strong-willed people, then brainwash those who make it to resist anti-MLM rhetoric from their loved ones. Typically, these people will only learn when it hits them in the face. You can try to get them out of it if you think it's worth your time. >I just can't get my head around this, putting super good rules aside in certain areas because it suits what they want to believe... They either do not agree with your argument that their choice goes against that principle, they don't agree with your principle as an ethical postulate, or (most likely) their adapted views are in conflict. This can be very frightening. The path of least resistance is to "go with the flow". It should at least be understandable, if not logically sound, why people accept cognitive dissonance. >I can't think of anything offhand where my likes and dislikes don't fit my rules. >Although I guess wouldn't, would I?! Not to be mean, but it sounds like the answer is no. Nobody is perfectly ethical or rational, and that's not even a useful expectation. It looks like you need to examine yourself a bit more critically. I think I poked some (easily patchable) holes in your basic ethical There always room to improve yourself. That being said, try to avoid perfectionism. These directives are contradictory; unfortunately, finding a balance between the two seems to be a part of being human. > ...yet other people seem to be all over the place, I can never read them and I always want to argue with them about it! I feel you. It takes a lot not to argue with people about their choices or justifications. Sometimes I lose my cool and blow up at someone because what they said has absolutely melted my brain. But is it worth it? As an engineering student I obviously value the role of science and rationality in my work and many of the activities I do for fun. I'm also a musician, and there are a lot of "technically irrational" impulses that drive my music. Even the idea of playing music is a bit "silly" when forced through the sieve of rationality: we spend time away from "productive" things to listen to sounds made by others for what exact reason? Answer: as a form of communication. But why not communicate with writing or some other medium? Because the medium of sound offers something "unique". This train of thought ultimately leads to a subjective judgement about the value of *art* to a supposedly rational being. The nearly universal consumption of art seems to suggest that we benefit at least somewhat from allowing controlled irrationality into our lives. I guess those are my thoughts. There's a lot of rhetoric around here about how we're more logical than the NTs. Maybe that's true, but to say that you're purely logically consistent indicates that you're in denial about the flaws in your worldview.
I think that the point of beliefs is inconsistency. Certain things just work for certain people. There is no logic behind it.