Reason and Emotion

by John Macmurray, Unknown Author

In this book, Macmurray develops with exceptional clarity his views on reason and emotion as interdependent, rather than opposed aspects of human personality. Underlying the lectures collected in this volume and giving them their unity is Macmurray's conviction that the contrast we habitually draw between "reason" and "emotion" is false and leads to the erroneous conclusion that our emotional life is irrational and must remain so. The proper contrast, Macmurray stresses, lies between "intellect" and "emotion", while "reason", as that which makes us human, expresses itself in both.

Genres: Philosophy, Psychology, Nonfiction

Hardcover

First published January 1, 1992

About the author

John Macmurray MC was a Scottish philosopher. His thought moved beyond the modern tradition begun by Descartes and continued in Britain by Locke, Berkeley and Hume. He made contributions in the fields of political science, religion, education, and philosophy in a long career of writing, teaching, and public speaking. After retirement he became a Quaker.

Reviews

[Sreena · Rating 3 out of 5]

Macmurray invites readers to reexamine their perception of reason and emotion, challenging conventional notions and encouraging a holistic understanding of the human condition.

Why it was interesting
one of the best parts of "Reason and Emotion" lies in Macmurray's examination of the interplay between reason and emotion in decision-making. He explores how these two forces often conflict, leading to internal struggles and dilemmas. Macmurray advocates for an integration of reason and emotion in decision-making processes, arguing that a purely rational approach neglects the richness of our emotional intelligence.

I found some sections to be a bit dense, and too much of academic way of writing.

But overall, it was a good one time read.

[Chow · Rating 5 out of 5]

Essentially, most of what it said with religion is related to what Theodore Zeldin said with enriching oneself with personal relationships. And because one supports the latter, so it makes one support this book as well. It provides a fresh angle to view religion.

Though, we must ignore that its sentence isn't the most straightforward (having some u-turns and roundabouts here and there), but that is common among writers in the last century and his is already quite little compared to the super-gibberish Gibbon, for example.

[Michael David · Rating 2 out of 5]

I honestly found the book too bland to have any lasting effect on me. Somehow, while I understand that much emotion triggers thought, I have never found thought to be necessary subject of emotion.

[Epictetus · Rating 1 out of 5]

First impressions, a doubtful book. E.g. “A conception of reason which is appliccable top science but not religion or art must be a false conception, or at least an inadequate one.” Why? The necessity of the scientific method to the sciences but not to art or religion disproves this.
Further impressions confirmed this. A weak mind, not properly trained in science. I have not read enough to judge whether he produces a striking or memorable phrase, but if he does that might be the consequence of the universal law of statistics rather than his own skill.
My assessment, on a scale of -5 to +5:
Quality of writing: -1 Toss lightly aside
Quality of content: -1 Toss lightly aside
Quality author: -1 Lightweight
Some examples of why I rate it thus:

A.) p. 19. "A conception of reason which is applicable to science but not religion or art must be a false conception, or at least an inadequate one." Why? The necessity of the scientific method to the sciences but not to art or religion disproves this.

B.) "There is an increasing recognition in educational circles of the urgent need for a proper training of the emotions." Nonsense on stilts. This was well understood by Plato and many others 2000 years before this author.

C.) p. 117 "Prejudice, bias, the heat of unreal emotions generated by associations of ideas, are everywhere—in ourselves." So what is a real emotion then? Who is this author to dictate which of our feelings are real and which we are mistaken about.