In Greek mythology, Apollo and Dionysus were
both sons of the might God Zeus. Apollo is the God of the Sun, Lightness, Music
and Poetry, while Dionysus lords over wine, ecstasy and intoxication. In
literary context, the stark contrast between them symbolizes the principles of
individualism versus wholeness, light versus darkness, and civilized society
versus primal nature.
In a contemporary context, Apollo and Dionysus
represent a philosophical dichotomy of Reason and Rational, versus Irrational Emotion
and Chaos. But, the Greeks never considered the two Gods to be opposites or
rivals. The Apollonian is based on reason and logical thinking. By contrast,
the Dionysian is based on chaos and appeals to the emotions and instincts. The
content of all great drama of life is based on the conflict created by the interaction
between these two.
Historically, Reason was assumed by ancient
philosophers to be superior to Emotion – it was what made humans human. The
contrast and dominion of the two Gods cannot be more starkly prevalent and
visible across domains today. The new era of Internet, Google, facts figures
and data at your fingertips, saw a segment of the populace make Reason dominate
their lives. But in some areas Emotion seems to have been elevated over Reason
– one only has to think of the endless portrayals of anger, greed and sex in
Hollywood films, the psychology-driven tricks of spin doctors in the political
game or the heart-wrenching efforts of marketers soliciting for the
philanthropic dollar.
The past few decades of
industrialization and corporatization saw the relationship between emotion and
reason as a challenging one. But the latest thinking and dynamic environmental
factors contests that assumption. The gap between emotion and reason is
narrowing – and to some, there no longer is
a gap. A large body of research in neuroscience and psychology has shown
that emotions are not the enemy of reason, but rather are a crucial part of it.
We are often faced with
rational decisions that involve a great many conflicting and confusing
alternatives. We usually decide on which course to take by weighing up the
options, and deciding which one is most beneficial to our well-being. But when
it is unclear which one this may be, our powers of reason are insufficient in
formulating an answer. In situations like these, our emotions take over.
The idea that emotion
impedes logic is pervasive and wrong. The key is to identify the emotions and
their associated potential outcomes on rational thinking. For example, anger
can lead to prejudiced decisions and a feeling of certainty about them. But
sadness has been linked to more careful decision-making and less confidence about them.
We do struggle every day to manage unruly
emotions with cool, clear intellect. We know now that thinking has both
emotional and logical components. Moral judgements do originate in the more
primitive, emotional parts of our brain. What we think of as rational choices
are more often simply unconsciously driven decisions rationalised after the
fact. But that doesn’t mean there is no hope for Reason. Elevating Emotion over
Reason is dangerous. It allows clear reign for irrational thinking, driven by
spontaneous emotions, unmediated by reflection. Fight or flight, kill or be
killed. But elevating Reason over Emotion doesn’t work either. It ignores what
we now know about how the mind actually works, how we make decisions that lead
to action.
We know Reason and Emotion are inextricably
intertwined. The trick is to get people to understand how, and why it’s
important to ensure we don’t take the less energy-intensive route of giving in
to our spontaneous emotions, or go to the other extreme path to allow pure
logic to ruin our spirit. Maybe the solution lies in better education in the
area of Introspection, Reason and Reasoning from an early age of life.
As J Krishnamurti beautifully summed up, “The
highest form of human intelligence is to observe oneself without judgement.”
