Humans are clearly emotional creatures. We get passionate, angry, jealous, joyous. But we are also rational, scientific creatures, able to control our emotions in order to think through problems. But how do we balance these two aspects of ourselves? Beck looks at the possible emotional benefits of astrology, which she admits has no scientific basis, in helping people construct meaningful lives. Ronson examines how the often well-intentioned passions of social justice activists can lead to bullying and unfairness.
Making use of the arguments of both Beck and Ronson, I want you to reflect on benefits and dangers of relying on our emotions, and answer the following question:
To what extent is allowing our emotions to interfere with our rational judgment dangerous? How should we properly balance the emotional and rational aspects of our selves?
Should we distinguish between emotions felt by individuals and emotions that take over a group? Is the latter more dangerous?
Do emotions act as a guide to who we really are, or can they obscure our identities? We talk approvingly of someone’s passions, but can they can also ‘take us over’, destroy us?
Beck sees astrology as an emotional coping mechanism. What are the dangers of such a coping mechanism? What would the dangers be in not having any such coping mechanisms?
What practical things can we do to control emotion excesses?
Ronson suggests we need to be more empathetic. Is it an emotion we can and should cultivate? Or is it a closer to a way of thinking, as you need to think through someone else’s feelings and ideas?
Beck suggests contemporary use of astrology is partly rational. Is she right? Consider how the debate over astrology relates to the broader question of reason and emotion.
