Sentiment Vs. Reason

Since the dawn of man, the head and heart have been at war. The no-rules, feel good, go with the flow Eve persuaded Adam to perform the ultimate irrational action, to displease their Creator. Then again, one could say it was the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge—reason itself—that got the first couple in trouble. Had they contented themselves to live as their fellow animals forsaking knowledge itself, had sentiment defeated reason, we would all be living in The Garden of Eden.

Oy vey. A narrative so simple and yet, so complex. It beautifully illustrates the ongoing struggle between the yang of reason and the yin of sentiment. Pathos vs. logos. Aphrodite vs. Apollo. The poet vs. the engineer. Ultimately, sentiment points her warm, fluffy finger at reason who in turn points his cold, steely digit at his bubbly bride.

Sentiment usually gets the best of reason. Reason requires effort. It can be time consuming. Sentiment just seems to have a stronger grip on the rope most of the time.

In 1774, Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe published “The Sorrows of Young Werther,” a novel about a broken-hearted young man who ultimately terminates his life with a pistol. Vital statistics were not what they are today but it is widely believed that “Werther” set off a string of copycat suicides throughout Europe and the novel was banned in several countries.

Some scholars believe “Werther” laid the foundation for the later Romantic literary movement, a reaction to the strictures imposed by the Enlightenment. Just as Thinking comes out of the shadows, Feeling boots him squarely in his over-sized head.

There was an industrial revolution, scientific and technological advances, the institution of capitalism, representative democracy, cures for diseases. Reason was doing OK until someone invented a moving picture camera. Edison's toy could have been used to deliver academic lectures to Peoria. Of course, Peoria would rather watch Vivien Leigh get all fluttery over Clark Gable and get even fluttier over that Ashley dude. Sentiment was back in business!

Then came radio and the flowering of Madison Avenue. By the timed television arrived on the scene, the ad men were quick to apply their skills to the tube. Fifty years later, they would play our hearts like Fischer played kingside pawns.

A quick note on bias, partisanship, unavoidable bias and universal bias. Journalists, like people, bring a set of biases to their work. Some biases are overt, others are cryptic, some others are sneaky and some are almost impossible to avoid. The most influential ism of our era might be simplism. Simplism does not simply mean simple, it means overly simple. Simple bordering on the ridiculous.

Newspapers, the forefathers of American journalism were always, to one degree or another, plagued by the burdens of simplism. Material costs limited space and forced editors to embrace the doctrine of simplism, either consciously or otherwise. Survival required short, snappy articles. Hence, newspapers kowtowed to sentiment at the expense of reason.

Editors often endorsed the prohibition of anything and everything because “No” could be expressed in fewer sentences than an exploration of unintended consequences, unintended costs, counterproductivity as well as the problems arising from the emergence of an imperial bureaucracy.

Newspapers reflexively advocated that governments should “Do something about______” because “Help” could be expressed in fewer sentences than an exploration of unintended consequences, unintended costs, counterproductivity as well as the problems arising from the emergence of an imperial bureaucracy.

Broadsides reflexively advocated for bureaucracy for bureaucracy sake because “Regulate” could be expressed in fewer sentences than an exploration of unintended consequences, unintended costs, counterproductivity as well as the problems arising from the emergence of an imperial bureaucracy.

Newspapers usually favored positions to which opposition required excessive verbiage. Simplism carries the day for sentiment. Radio and television took the doctrine of simplism to a higher level. The constraints of time are less yielding than the constraints of space. Often simplistic became always simplistic.

Reason was banned from broadcast studios. Through the lens of simplism it is easier to view the hardship of the spending cut than the hardship caused by the spending. Reason does not sit on the panels that discuss debts and deficits, the solvency of public pensions, the solvency of entitlements, or the value of our currency. We don't need no stinkin facts.

To the extent that reason is allowed the occasional chirp, simplism quickly drowns him out. Thus:

We hear more about “settled science” than we hear about objective analysis of climate data.

Millions of children grow up without fathers because of pathos-laden bromides advocating the financial support of single mothers.

Tens of millions of Americans face a lifetime of unemployment because the peddlers of conspicuous compassion jack the minimum wage thereby making it extremely difficult for unskilled people to find entry level jobs.

We have elevated tax rates far beyond the optimum rate of revenue enhancement because higher rates satisfy a childish fixation with “fairness.”

We endure mindless prattle about the evil one per cent by people who are in the 99^th percentile of income on a global basis.

We endure endless chatter about the one per cent of top earners from passionate fools who fail to mention that composition of the economic strata are constantly changing (except for those families who are locked into the culture of dependency for generation after generation.)

We continue to increase funding to public schools that fail to teach literacy, numeric competency, World History, American History, civics, scientific reasoning, rudimentary economics or anything else that might promote civilization but that do promote self esteem, self delusion, an appreciation for “social justice” and the celebration of all things politically correct. A generation emerges with hypertrophied hearts and contempt for truth.

This is an inexhaustible subject. Show me any topic and I will show you an argument being fought and won with slogan, sound bite and poster child. Reason be damned.

The triumphant sentiment rains her spoils on all of us. Self esteem has become the gold standard of pedagogy. Kids who can't add two numbers without a calculator are confident of their mathematical proficiency.

Handicapped kids are mainstreamed to make all of us feel good about inclusion as we neglect their special needs. We forbid dodgeball and ruin the joy of competition by pretending that no on keeps score. We have multiple valedictorians and we have zero valedictorians. We have trophies and awards for everyone including children who do not want and do not strive for trophies and awards. Everyone is a champion for fifteen minutes.

Unbridled sentiment does not always bring smiles. We have witnessed the rise of “offense culture.” Sports mascots offend the vocal and the verbose. So too, do Nativity scenes. And crosses. And portraying certain ethnic groups as criminals. And displaying beautiful women in any context is “objectification.” And describing dark-skinned residents of Caribbean Islands as “black” when they should be described as “African-American,” even though they are neither African nor American is now deemed offensive. If you are not profoundly offended by something, you simply are not making the effort.

Jay Leno's “Jay Walking” is a comedy staple wherein the talk show host takes to the street to ask common people questions like “Who fought World War II?” So rich is the field of ignorance that "Jay Walking" has inspired several imitators. Jesse Waters and Mark Dice will ask people why we celebrate the 4^th of July or what year the Declaration of Independence was signed. They sometimes go to pricey colleges to ask their questions. What is doubly discouraging is not just the usual wrong answer to simple question but also the pride so many of the queried display. They are content with their mental vapidity, smugly celebrating their post-fact existence as they cruise through life with uncluttered minds.

On the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator just under 60% of people surveyed are Feelers and the other 40% are Thinkers. Pop culture caters to majority tastes. In the realm of what has been labeled entertainment, Sentiment does not just trounce Reason, she spikes the ball in his end zone. Smart people are portrayed as socially awkward, morally challenged and always missing out on the folk wisdom that enriches the lives of simpletons.

“Hazel” taught us that maids know more about human nature than lawyers. “Columbo” taught us that smart people are evil. “Law and Order” continues the tradition of evil smart people but it also expands the scope of evil to include all rich white folk.

In movies and television children are wiser than adults. Woody and Carla are privy to a certain sagacity that escapes Lilith and Frasier. And let us never forget movements like Farm Aid where Sentiment rubs salt into Reason's wounds. Willie Nelson and John Mellencamp tug at our heartstrings to lobby for the expansion of corporate welfare and the further enrichment of our landed gentry. In your logical face!

Barack Obama makes voters feel even better about themselves. In their non-thinking, high-feeling cores, people formulated the belief that voting for “The One” would confirm the elector as an open-minded, caring and concerned individual and the country would be better for it. Did they have any concerns about Barack Obama's character, his mysterious past, his limited political experience, his limited work experience and his absence of any—as in zero. As in not even a paper route or a shift manager at McDonald's—executive experience?

No. Facts suck. Facts involve thinking and...what was that again? Just feel it, man. Just feel it. Just feel it.