Well, it's also a concept. We have a concept of what reason is, and it's tucked into that words and what it elicits for each of us. — Coben
Etymologically, "reason" comes from a root that means "to put in order", or "to fit together", which suggests that "reason" is fundamentally about understanding the relationships between things. — Pfhorrest
The established standard on reason, understood as the primary activity of the conscious mind, gives no origin or identity to it. — Mww
I'm highly dubious of attempts to 'explain reason'. — Wayfarer
Absolutely. I’ve harped on this forever.......reason cannot explain itself without being used to explain itself. No one is going to take seriously anything to patently circular. — Mww
I am not quite sure what you are saying.You might have a 'concept of language' but I don't see how that advances understanding of language. It's too multifaceted to reduce to a concept. — Wayfarer
I disagree that understanding is the origin of all concepts. I think it is misunderstanding that is the origin of concepts. Concepts are generated in an attempt to resolve misunderstanding. Misunderstanding leads to the creation of concepts, which leads to greater and greater misunderstandingSorry...I got carried away. You asked about the “origin of the concept “reason””, which is easy enough to answer: understanding. Understanding is the source of all concepts, but the question remains as to whether reason is a concept. The argument has been made that a definition is sufficient to justify the possibility of a concept, but we find so many definitions for reason that conceptual veracity for it diminishes accordingly. — Mww
What is the origin of the concept "reason", how did its applications develop, and what does the term mean in relationship to current knowledge? — Enrique
What is the origin of the concept "reason", how did its applications develop, and what does the term mean in relationship to current knowledge?
I think it is misunderstanding that is the origin of concepts. Concepts are generated in an attempt to resolve misunderstanding. — Yohan
Reason(n): human faculty which creates and/or develops an argument. — Galuchat
Why would you confuse "an argument" with "knowledge statements"? — Galuchat
So you’re saying Fermat didn’t reason to his theorem and Wiles didn’t reason to his proof? How would you account for either the theorem or the proof, if the cognitive faculties of each of their respective originators were not in play? — Mww
There is no justification for why they discovered it. — alcontali
If it were possible to discover new knowledge by reasoning, i.e. by using a documented procedure, we would have discovered all knowledge already. — alcontali
There is no justification for why they discovered it. — alcontali
Both were the products of pure reason — Mww
The justification for the why of the proof was nothing more than the mere existence of the theorem — Mww
The fact that we haven’t, and the fact that we understand knowledge is always tentative, makes explicit either knowledge isn’t that which is discovered, or reasoning isn’t the means for it. — Mww
P vs NP Problem
If it is easy to check that a solution to a problem is correct, is it also easy to solve the problem? This is the essence of the P vs NP question. — Third millenium prize
But we still have a concept of reason - what the idea of reason distinguishes, describes
and then
we have the faculty. — Coben
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.