Dikili for As the disagreement between lato and Aristotle demonstrates, reason and rationality, like liberty and freedom, have no single, settled meaning Yet deciding jst what reason and rationality mean”like the determination of the meaning of liberty and freedom”is a serios affair with imortant olitical conseqences If, for instance, we hold reason to be a rely intellectal faclty, one 184 thinking olitics that only hilosohers flly exercise, we may be ersaded by lato's argment for the establishment of an aristocratic or monarchical system of rle If we believe that reason is also a ractical faclty, one that everyone exercises in his daily affairs, we may be ersaded by Aristotle's argment for the establishment of a more democratic system of rle In trn, if we think that reason inheres not only in men bt also in women, we may be ersaded that atriarchal rle is illegitimate in any of its forms In qestioning the stats of reason, Focalt asks: What are its historical effects What are its limits, and what are its dangers How can we exist as rational beings, fortnately committed to racticing a rationality that is nfortnately crisscrossed by intrinsic dangers Focalt goes on to say that he does not mean to criticize rationality er se, bt only to demonstrate how ambigos things are63William Connolly likewise observes the inherent instability of words sch as reason and rationality, words that constitte the terms of olitical discorse Dikili 2016

Leave a Reply