The dilemma of a logical mind


the dilemma of a logical mind

Let me tell you a story about a man with a purely logical mind. He shall be referred to as “He” henceforth.

There lived a curious man who was never satisfied with simple answers, he always sought something deeper in every simple answer he got. He never stopped asking questions, as a matter of fact, he couldn’t stop asking questions. He was deeply ingrained with the belief that there is a scientific/logical reason for everything that is, that was and would be. He believed the stones were hard for a logical reason, that the plants were green for a logical reason and that the dog trust man and would protect man for a logical reason. He never stopped seeking for an explanation for everything that is, and everything everyone does. The only reason why some things are yet to be completely understood was because we don’t yet know the logical explanation to it, according to him.

He was a critically logical man to the extent that he questioned everything questionable. He questioned people’s actions, he questioned nature’s flora and fauna. He even questioned his own actions, thinking and feelings. He questioned his questioning. He was thoroughly inquisitive. He would sometimes reach a crossroad where his own logic would seem insufficient enough to be convincing to him. He would either ruminate over it, or push it aside for another day when he is logically ready to dissect it. When he sought for opinion from other concerning this crossroads, he is either left in a state of misgiving or dissatisfaction. He believed everything can be logically explained on its own without a prerequisite for “belief”.

Life was a jigsaw puzzle to him. Everything required careful analytical thinking that would lead to a logical explanation that is valid for every instance of that thing. He never for once believed that, just maybe, some things cannot be logically explained. Or perhaps there isn’t just any logic explanation required for it, because a logical explanation destroys the essence of it. This to him was simply an intellectual laziness, which he described as a lackadaisical attitude or an unwillingness towards finding the objective truth.
the dilemma of a logical mind 2

He went through life fairly smoothly with this thought process, able to navigate life with happiness. He would always seek logical explanation for everything he encountered, good or bad, and would find it for the most part. This makes him not to suffer the emotional pains usually associated with his experiences, because when he is supposed to feel terrible, he looks for an explanation for why he feels terrible and then the terrible feelings goes away with the cold wind of logic. From the perspective of an onlooker, he seem rugged and able to take anything life throws at him. He also seem very happy in an unusual manner. One would expect someone to experience dark moods that they cannot control once in a while, but he always seem to logical break everything down, eventually feeling no pain at all. His life seem enviable to an average emotional person.

But there was something that troubles him, which doesn’t trouble an average emotional person.

He was never able to understand or explain the complexities of both human (and animals) emotional connection. Each time he tried to be logical in his understanding of human emotional connection he would hit a dilemma because it made no logical sense. He would watch how two lovers always showed interest in each other’s lives, how a partner’s happiness is entirely tied to the other’s happiness, his only explanation for this was that it was evolutionary advantageous for the survival of the species. Why a partner would grieve for years after the death of his/her partner? He couldn’t explain what evolutionary advantage that would be. He couldn’t understand why a significant other would just want his “mere” attention if she didn’t need anything tangible in particular. He also couldn’t solve the puzzle of a mother deliberately aborting an unborn child, since that wasn’t evolutionary advantageous. He couldn’t connect with his fellow men on an emotional level. Emotional connection doesn’t even have any meaning to him other than an unnecessary “want” by a human to release some pleasure hormones in the brain. He couldn’t understand loyalty between two romantic partners. Spreading genes among multiple partners made more sense to him.

His friend made it known to him that there are some aspects of life that a completely logical explanation for them are not going to be logical, ironically. This just didn’t settle well with his inner self. It was just too simple for him to accept that “well, it’s not just logical, let’s accept it that way”. He believed there is something missing that is required for it to be logically explained. The missing piece of the puzzle was either a lack of adequate knowledge, shortcomings in intellectual capacity to comprehend it or an unwillingness to admit a fact staring at our face because we don’t want it to lose the meaning we have given it. He would never be freed from the dilemma as long as he kept approaching those emotional things in a logical manner.

Perhaps he was right after all, perhaps life was all a jigsaw after all. Perhaps his friend was right, perhaps some things are outside the scope of logic. Perhaps they were both right. Maybe there is a logical and a “non-logical” explanation both valid for some things in life. Be the judge.

Previous articleWhy do people hate?
A Nigerian undergraduate, medico , technology and health enthusiast.Stay tuned and follow me on IG @ dr_dee_