Alison, Dom, before adding my reply I had to recall some stepts amde by the
three of us:
please, find my post at the very end of the letter.
I apologize with those who are not interested in this thread. We are at a
difficult junction.

>p.s. I consider murder committed for rational purposes and in cold blood to
>be marginally preferable to the "crime of passion" which is impelled by
>sentiment and unreasoning lust. If you're going to do awful things, you
>should do them for intelligent reasons.
>Dom


>There is not such a think as Reason and conscience. These are our
>inventions.
>The relation between Ego and Super-Ego is a
>fundamentally hysterical and neurotical one, for me. We are a mess.
>The obsession of the self about its own rights being the matrix of all.

>Justice is fallible. Reason too.
>I do not understand what exact line of reasoning are you following.
>Erminia


> There are indeed such things as Reason and conscience. They are our
>inventions.
> Dom


> The problem is: who is to judge what is rational and what is not?
> Alison
>
>

 >"Rational" murder requires, first,
>the dehumanisation of the one to be murdered.  Even Herr Hitler was,
>alas, a human being: to justify his murder on the grounds that he has
>foreited his humanity creates for me too uncomfortable a mirror of Nazi
>ideology.
Alison



> I am entirely unsure how you distinguish morally between murder committed
> for "rational purposes" and "in cold blood" and those committed in
> "passion".
>Alison


>The person who takes his rationalisations for true reasons is as
>culpable in this regard as the person who gets by without reasons and
simply
>and shamelessly does whatever he feels like; but at least the former
>recognises, at some level, that bestial irrationality is something to be
>ashamed of. Premeditated atrocity is the human way; any dumb brute can do
>mindless aggro...
>Dom

Dom seems to believe that the word "Reason=ragione= from the LATIN
RATIO = Calcolo= calculation, argument , which was used by Cicero to
translate into
(our= Italian, English, French, Spanish, ect) Latinate world the greek
word/concept
of "logos"= say the faculty through which a man obtains "knowledge"...... is
equivalent
"consciousness".
The process of reasoning does imply the achievement of knowledge,
but certainly not necessarily of conscience (if for conscience you are
meaning
"the ability to act in a morally reflective way").
If for "conscience" and "reason" you are just meaning that a person
is more or less aware of the fact that he/she is reasoning and acting under
a certain  chosen ode of conduct
(and not hot-bloodily, irrationally, thoughtlessly), then nobody here wishes
to negate the intellectual existence
of such a faculty. In this sense, reason is merely the faculty of following
a discourse, of articulating one.
But you do not mean that.
You attribute to "reason and conscience" an ethical dimension "per
eccellenza".
And you also prize them for existing as "our inventions".

Aristotle indicated the act of reasoning merely as a process of creating
strict syllogisms which would lead
to rigorous argumentation. In his definition I do not see any "moral"
implication.
Also in medieval time, within the neo-platonic tradition, "reason" is merely
the equivalent of "intellect",
say the ability to see reality as it is.

It is Christianity which introduces, through our St Thomas, the further
ethical  development
which - granting to the "reasoning"(ratio)  the sole ability to describe in
a discursive way,
 attribute to the "intellect" the ability to  morally
judge and discriminate.

Hobbs again will study in the Greek style "reason" as "calculation" to reach
scientific knowledge.


It is Kant that introduces the idea of reasoning as the ability to grasp
also the moral laws of the world.
A positive view reinforced by Hegel's idealism for which Reason can reach
the absolute ultimate knowledge and truth.


And what does "conscience" have to do with "reason"?
Well , from the Latin meaning,
(from "conscire= conoscere insieme= To know collectively something, the same
set of things")
it emerges that "conscience"  is nothing but an agreed set of conventions
and laws
(which therefore, in my opinion , should not claim to possess universal
transcendental values
but only a partial, sectarian one).

If for "conscience" - as in Dom's use - we mean  the moral conscience, then
this is nothing but the
intimate reflection to investigate our own actions to judge them, value them
as good or evil, with a following
personal, internal satisfaction or remorse. These inner evaluations that the
self makes of him?herself as an acting human being
are made on the sole base of what conditions us. So, I judge and condemn
myself as   sick coward
 if, for example, in my own community, religion or social or political
beliefs with all their
established ethics I am expected to be brave and successful.
Aren't  the majority of sad suicides the consequences of this inflexible
confrontation which our supposed free conscience
(which is on the contrary deeply controlled and
manipulated from the above) makes on a daily base with the tyrannical
"ideals" set for our torment and damnation
by society and civilization?
(Think about Japanese Hara-kiri for social shame).
I better do without a tyrannical conscience, As for my reasoning, I deeply
suspect them of being totally irrational,.
So, forgive if this is all rubbish.

Erminia





%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%