I've heard it asserted several times in quite different contexts that "people

I've heard it asserted several times in quite different contexts that "people

I've heard it asserted several times in quite different contexts that "people make decisions primarily using emotional criteria, and only after the fact do they then use reason to justify this decision." I'm curious both to hear your response(s) in general, and perhaps also in a more specific context. If I understand Karl Marx' economic theory correctly, he asserts that the foundation of all social relationships is technology, or economic relationships, or how people earn a living. Social, political, religious, and governmental structures then develop as a justification of the fundamental underlying economic relationships. I'm curious on philosophical responses to this assertion, because it seems to me that it is the basis for the crucial argument that then follows. He then asserts that, because technology is constantly evolving, while bureaucratic structures are static, that a "dissonance" develops over time, which must eventually result in a re-balancing. so that the other structures are then in alignment with the technology of the times (after which the process then repeats). It reminds me in a way of Stephen J Gould's "punctuated equilibrium" theory of evolution. Thanks for any clarity you can bring to these ideas!

Read another response by Stephen Maitzen
Read another response about Rationality