Symbols are irrational. If symbols are irrational, and humans are unable to escape symbols, then humans are fundamentally irrational.
In what sense do you mean that symbols are irrational? Is it because they only imperfectly represent the world that is “really out there?” Is there a better option for humans/hypothetical other-minds to use instead of symbols?
Symbols by definition are analogies to reality. Analogies are not rationally based, they are rhetorically based. Rhetoric is by no means rational in the sense that this community uses the word. Therefore language is by definition irrational.
Is there a better option for humans/hypothetical other-minds to use instead of symbols?
No, that is my point. Humans have no other way to relate to reality. The idea of a better option is a fiction of essentialist philosophy.
In what sense do you mean that symbols are irrational? Is it because they only imperfectly represent the world that is “really out there?” Is there a better option for humans/hypothetical other-minds to use instead of symbols?
Symbols by definition are analogies to reality. Analogies are not rationally based, they are rhetorically based. Rhetoric is by no means rational in the sense that this community uses the word. Therefore language is by definition irrational.
No, that is my point. Humans have no other way to relate to reality. The idea of a better option is a fiction of essentialist philosophy.