Remember “The Curse of Opinion: May Reason Rest in Peace”? That earlier contribution to The Age of the Imbecile column? In case you don’t, fret not; here is a recap: if one has the inclination to say something, that is in the natural state of things is inherently nonsensical, which they seldom lack, about something that they neither know a single thing about (i.e. them being absurdly unqualified to render an informed [emphasis added] opinion on the subject matter), nor entertain the faintest interest in (i.e. they are totally disinterested in the subject matter), uttering the magical words ‘this is my opinion’ would remedy the situation as it never fails to put them in the ‘right’ (Nasif).
Well, the tendency of liking transcends human nonsensicality to a whole new level.
An overarching classifying mechanism has been imbedded into our perceptive faculties. We have become naturally paved towards classifying all that we perceive through our sensory receptors as things we like or dislike, in variant degrees. Our perception therefore has become, unintentionally, the subject of mere sentimentalities; those imposing the bondage of our irrational whims upon it.
The issue here is a matter of utility, in the pragmatic sense of the word, rather than our emotional satisfaction with the sensory input.
The question is thus: Does it really serve us to like or dislike everything that touches on the threshold of our awareness—that is, to blindfold our perception with the black-and-white spectacles of sentimentality? If so, to what end?
Suppose a person wanders off in the desert. After hours of walking in unbearable heat and under scorching sunlight, they come across an oasis. Their lips are parched; their throat is totally dry; and, their strength is waning as their muscles and vital organs struggle to function due to dehydration. Standing by the pond, dazed, they realize that they don’t have any drinking utensil in their possession. Every second counts. Their survival is at stake; and, every second counts. It is one of the rarities wherein the rational and instinctive person would conduct themself identically: ensuring the survival of their body.
But not the one enslaved to sentimentalities. No. For this person has long departed from both rationality and instinct, inebriated themself on the elixir of over-sentimentality. Their eyes faintly captures the image of water; nonetheless, upon perceiving the latter, that person recognizes that they dislike drinking off their palm. And, if that is the case with their palm, their dislike is tenfolds aggravated with respect to drinking through ‘unhygienic’ (not sanitized) medium. Paralyzed with their over-sentimentality towards the means, regardless of the end, they keep gazing at the pond until they fall unconscious.
What utility did this over-sentimentality furnish? None, whatsoever! Quite the contrary, it compromised the survival of the individual.
Admittedly, this parable has an element of extremity to it. Notwithstanding, its morale elucidate the irrationality and hazards involved in universal ‘liking/disliking’ of things with astounding precision.
The universalized tendency to like or dislike, and its consequent over-sentimentality, would only inhibit one’s better judgment of things; if not cause one to act counterintuitively in a harmful manner [emphasis added]. Dieting for someone suffering from acute diabetes should never be a question of liking—instead, of pragmatic utility. The same could be said about cardio workouts for people with heart conditions. In fine, liking is a sentimentality that is solely fit for application vis-á-vis our disposition towards the complementarities—never the essentials [emphasis added]—of life.
Having that said, in a nutshell, our tendency to like or dislike must be suspended; even, omitted altogether; in considering questions and matters pertaining to the essentials of life; and, it should only be allowed to be engaged with respect to things of complementary nature; as it serves no purpose, none whatsoever, in regard of the former matters. Thereon, it would at best constitute an impediment for our pragmatism in attending matters of significance—let alone its propensity to bear detrimental consequences, by the power of impractical over-sentimentality.
Reference
Nasif, Alan. “The Curse of Opinion: May Reason Rest in Peace.” Intelligence Scoop – A Blog Addressing Politics, Sociology, and Philosophy, Economics, and Psychology, 20 May 2021, www.intel-scoop.com/the-curse-of-opinion-may-reason-rest-in-peace/.
[…] policy is freedom from prejudice; that our decisions should be independent of all impressions of dislike or affection for Foreign States and their governments [my italics: added for emphasis].”” […]