On the rational vs the sympathetic mind, from an article by Wendell Berry

MarkD

MarkD

Keeper of the Hounds & Garden
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
This might fit better in a philosophy sub forum but if there is one I missed it. So as a second choice I think it also relates to mental health and well being. Wendell Berry is a respected poet, novelist and environmentalist. Here is an extended excerpt from the essay "Two Minds" from a book he wrote in 2003 called Citizen Papers: Two Minds - by Wendell Berry I think what he writes is interesting and insightful and I believe it helps make the case for the value and continued relevance of religion, even if that is sometimes easily corrupted and turned to self serving purposes.

"It is often proposed, nowadays, that if we would only get rid of religion and other leftovers from our primitive past and become enlightened by scientific rationalism, we could invent the new values and ethics needed to preserve the natural world. This proposal is perfectly reasonable and perfectly doubtful. It supposes that we can empirically know and rationally understand everything involved, which is exactly the supposition that has underwritten our transgressions the natural world in the first place.

Obviously we need to use our intelligence. But how much intelligence have we got? And what sort of intelligence is it that we have? And how, at its best, does human intelligence work?

In order to try to answer these questions I am going to suppose for a while that there are two different kinds of human mind: the Rational Mind and another which, for want of a better term, I will call the Sympathetic Mind. I will say now, and try to keep myself reminded, that these terms are going to appear to be allegorical, too neat and too separate - though I need to say also that their separation was not invented by me.

The Rational Mind, without being anywhere perfectly embodied, is the mind we all are supposed to be trying to have. It is the mind that the most powerful and influential people think they have. Our schools exist mainly to educate and propagate and authorize the Rational Mind. The Rational Mind is objective, analytical, and empirical; it makes itself up only by considering facts; it pursues truth by experimentation; it is uncorrupted by preconception, received authority, religious belief, or feeling. Its ideal products are the proven fact, the accurate prediction, and the “informed decision.” It is, you might say, the official mind of science, industry, and government.

The Sympathetic Mind differs from the Rational Mind, not by being unreasonable, but by refusing to limit knowledge or reality to the scope of
reason or factuality or experimentation, and by making reason the servant of things it considers precedent and higher."


I think this may be of interest at least to @Gary O', @Nathan, @Paco Dennis and @PeppermintPatty
 

Last edited:
The Sympathetic Mind, as you define it, seems to transcend strict rationality and embraces a wider range of human experiences and understanding. It recognizes the importance of subjective perspectives, emotions, intuition, and values in shaping our understanding of reality. It acknowledges that there are aspects of life that cannot be easily measured or explained by rational analysis alone. This mindset values empathy, compassion, and a connection to the deeper dimensions of human existence. It is kind of like using both sides of your brain. The left, being the rational side, and right, being the sympathetic. :)
 
One of my most humbling experiences has been the realisation that multiple degrees in the science of human behaviour are not the defining factor in my therapeutic arsenal. It is the non linear

aspects of my perspective which reach the majority of my deeply wounded clients. Refined by my childhood, I have the gift of intimacy, the capacity to connect on a

deep level, to share love and compassion while suspending judgement. Empathy. Isolation is the

greatest enemy of the people I support. Give them a sense of belonging, a sense of being loved, many will do the

excruciating work necessary to climb out of the pit. Without it, the attrition is heinous.
 

Oh my heart. I just chanced on this thread and there's Shalimar, on one of the last days of her life, speaking with such wisdom, caring and sympathy for others. What a great loss for her patients, and really, for all of us who knew her.
 
Della said:
Oh my heart. I just chanced on this thread and there's Shalimar, on one of the last days of her life, speaking with such wisdom, caring and sympathy for others. What a great loss for her patients, and really, for all of us who knew her.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? I didn’t realize she was ill. So sorry to hear it.
 
SquattingDog told us in the General Discussion section, Mark. I don't think she was ill, I'm guessing it had to do with her unbearable grief over the recent death of her son. So sad.
 
Many years ago when I was on jury duty, at the conclusion of the trial, the judge asked us if there were any questions. A juror, a woman, asked, "Must my decision be based on the facts, or can I use my instincts?"
The judge replied, "I can't tell you how to reach your conclusions."
This juror then proceeded to base her decision on sheer fantasy. She admitted herself that she called the defendant guilty solely because she felt drawn to the plaintiff,
 
MarkD said:
This might fit better in a philosophy sub forum but if there is one I missed it. So as a second choice I think it also relates to mental health and well being. Wendell Berry is a respected poet, novelist and environmentalist. Here is an extended excerpt from the essay "Two Minds" from a book he wrote in 2003 called Citizen Papers: Two Minds - by Wendell Berry I think what he writes is interesting and insightful and I believe it helps make the case for the value and continued relevance of religion, even if that is sometimes easily corrupted and turned to self serving purposes.

"It is often proposed, nowadays, that if we would only get rid of religion and other leftovers from our primitive past and become enlightened by scientific rationalism, we could invent the new values and ethics needed to preserve the natural world. This proposal is perfectly reasonable and perfectly doubtful. It supposes that we can empirically know and rationally understand everything involved, which is exactly the supposition that has underwritten our transgressions the natural world in the first place.

Obviously we need to use our intelligence. But how much intelligence have we got? And what sort of intelligence is it that we have? And how, at its best, does human intelligence work?

In order to try to answer these questions I am going to suppose for a while that there are two different kinds of human mind: the Rational Mind and another which, for want of a better term, I will call the Sympathetic Mind. I will say now, and try to keep myself reminded, that these terms are going to appear to be allegorical, too neat and too separate - though I need to say also that their separation was not invented by me.

The Rational Mind, without being anywhere perfectly embodied, is the mind we all are supposed to be trying to have. It is the mind that the most powerful and influential people think they have. Our schools exist mainly to educate and propagate and authorize the Rational Mind. The Rational Mind is objective, analytical, and empirical; it makes itself up only by considering facts; it pursues truth by experimentation; it is uncorrupted by preconception, received authority, religious belief, or feeling. Its ideal products are the proven fact, the accurate prediction, and the “informed decision.” It is, you might say, the official mind of science, industry, and government.

The Sympathetic Mind differs from the Rational Mind, not by being unreasonable, but by refusing to limit knowledge or reality to the scope of
reason or factuality or experimentation, and by making reason the servant of things it considers precedent and higher."


I think this may be of interest at least to @Gary O', @Nathan, @Paco Dennis and @PeppermintPatty
Click to expand...
Oh! That is so beautifully written. It gives me goosebumps. Reading it is like listening to a beautiful ballad. That’s a profound post.
Did all that come from your thoughts.
That’s good.
 
PeppermintPatty said:
Oh! That is so beautifully written. It gives me goosebumps. Reading it is like listening to a beautiful ballad. That’s a profound post.
Did all that come from your thoughts.
That’s good.
Click to expand...

No it is all from Wendell Berry. I find it thought provoking and insightful as well as a much more concise parallel expression to a book I read very slowly over the last couple years written by Iain McGilchrist called The Matter With Things. Of course Berry being a poet goes right to the heart of the matter while Iain approached the same topic in prose bringing in scholarship in a number of fields with thousands of studies and other works carefully cited.

In his novel Jayber Crow Wendell Berry writes the most moving description of a human soul I have ever read. Pretty sure I’ve shared it here before I can do so again here when I find it.

Here it is as the highlighted part but I think you need what leads up to it too.

"And so I came along in time to know the end of the age of steamboating. I would learn later that there had been other ages of the river that I had arrived too late to know but that I could read about and learn to imagine. There was at first the age when no people were here, and I have sometimes felt at night that absence grow present in my mind, that long silence in which no human name was spoken or given, and the nameless river made no sound of any human tongue. And then there was the Indian age when names were called that have never been spoken in the present language of Port William.

Then came the short ages of us white people, the ages of the dugout, the flatboat, the keelboat, the log raft, the steamboat. And I have lived on now into the age of the diesel towboat and recreational boating and water skiing. And yet it is hard to look at the river in its calm, just after daylight or just before dark, and believe that history has happened to it. The river, the river itself, leaves marks but bears none. It is only the water flowing in the path that other water has worn.

Or is that other water really “other”, or is it the same water always running, flowing always toward the gathering of all waters, and always rising and returning again, and again flowing? I knew this river first when I was a little boy, and I know it now when I am an old man once again living beside it … and almost seventy years! … and always when i have watched it I have been entranced and mystified. What is it? Is it the worn trough of itself that is a feature of the land and is marked on maps, or is it the water flowing? Or is it the land itself that over time is shaped by the flowing water, and it caught by no map?

The surface of the quieted river as I thought in those old days at Squire’s Landing, as I think now, is like a window looking into another world that is like this one except that it is quiet. Its quietness makes it seem perfect. The ripples are like the slats of a blind or a shutter through which we we see imperfectly what is perfect. Though that other world can be seen only momentarily, it looks everlasting. As the ripples become more agitated, the window darkens and the other world is hidden. As I did not know then but know now, the surface of the water is like a living soul, which is easy to disturb, is often disturbed, but, growing calm, shows what it was, is, and will be."

I decided to read it when a Christian friend shared this list of books recommended by Russell Moore who I've also heard on podcasts and videos.
 
Last edited:
“As you are, you are Buddha.” There’s nothing to do, there’s nothing to fabricate, all there is to do is to accept reality without running all over the place, without complaining, without asking other people to explain it. Don’t remain at the superficial level of words, don’t remain at the surface of thing, don’t remain at the level of the wavelets of your mind, but go deep down in the boundless ocean.

Taiun JP Faure, january 2022
 
Paco Dennis said:
“As you are, you are Buddha.” There’s nothing to do, there’s nothing to fabricate, all there is to do is to accept reality without running all over the place, without complaining, without asking other people to explain it. Don’t remain at the superficial level of words, don’t remain at the surface of thing, don’t remain at the level of the wavelets of your mind, but go deep down in the boundless ocean.

Taiun JP Faure, january 2022
Click to expand...
Deep down in the boundless ocean of your mind --that is where the answers are.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top