How We Decide

One of the more interesting questions I'm pursuing in my reading and writing is this simple question: "what does it mean to be human" exactly? I loved Rob Bell's description in Sex God that humans are both spirit and body (not animals which are body with no spirit and not angels which are spirits with no body). I've since learned that Bell was building upon the work and thinking of Augustine and C.S. Lewis. 

I've recently read a book that I highly suggest for those of you who are interested in the ways in which science and religion are coming together in our time to help us understand the project of being human. 

The book, How We Decide (by Jonah Lehrer, 2009), combats Plato's conviction (and now longstanding cataract) that reason is meant to keep emotion in check. Hence, the more moral/successful/wise a person is, the more his/her reason is controlling emotion. Plato uses the analogy of a chariot and horse (chariot corresponds with reason and the horse, emotion). 

Lehrer thinks that the distinction between reason and emotion is false. He argues, that the two are essentially, the same coin just two different sides. In his book, he demonstrates how reason is dangerous when all emotion is abandoned. For instance, psychopaths, are not unreasonable people. Quite the contrary. However, psychopaths (because of abuse, isolation, etc.) are unable to feel . . . unable to imagine what it would be like to be someone else. Because they cannot feel and imagine, they are more inclined to violence and manipulation. The first thing we learn about humans, is that we have an amazing capacity to love and that capacity must be exercised and expanded.

Lehrer convincingly suggest that the truly moral person is one who knows when to approach life as a science (reason) and when to approach life as an art (emotion). He believes that the fully developed person works his/her way through life with an innate sense of distinguishing between the two. 

In the conclusion of the book, Lehrer offers an analogy to bring everything together. He suggests that it might help for some to view life as a poker game (work with me here). There is an element of poker that is purely mathematical, based upon reason, probability, etc. In fact, most novices get in trouble because they are unable to comprehend the basic science of poker. However, poker is also an art. Often times, what you are actually holding in your hands is not as important as what others think you are holding. Hence, the art, drama, creative interlude. Of course, one can take the analogy too far and suggest his ethic is significantly flawed because it is based in self-interest (something he works hard throughout the entire book to dismantle).

If you struggle picking out a box of cereal at the supermarket . . . or which job offer might be the best for you and your family . . . or which shirt to wear for the important meeting . . . or what color to paint your bedroom . . . this book is for you.