Is absolute reason just a superstition?

The influence of our wishes upon our beliefs is a matter of common knowledge and observation, yet the nature of this influence is very generally misconceived. It is customary to suppose that the bulk of our beliefs are derived from some rational ground, and that desire is only an occasional disturbing force. The exact opposite of this would be nearer the truth: the great mass of beliefs by which we are supported in our daily life is merely the bodying forth of desire, corrected here and there, at isolated points, by the rude shock of fact.

Man is essentially a dreamer, wakened sometimes for a moment by some peculiarly obtrusive element in the outer world, but lapsing again quickly into the happy somnolence of imagination. Freud claimed that our dreams at night are the pictured fulfillment of our wishes. But might he not equally included the day-dreams which we call beliefs?

We have a hierarchy of comforting beliefs: those private to the individual, those which we share with our family, those common to our class or nation, and finally those that are equally delightful to all mankind.

Neo-classical economists pioneered their creed on the "rational" acting man. And many disputes over the fallibility of the economic method of reasoning typically decay into facile disputes between economists and social-psychology types over whether we think or act rationally.

Why don't we put on our Hume hats and look past that debate to the true emptiness of "reason" and "rationality"?"

Kant had to invent the distinction between 'pure' and 'practical' reason to circumvent the causation debate, but really when are we going to wake up?

Even when we do reason deductively we must accept that there is still some underlying assumption from which we choose to work. Take the idea of science for example. We all probably roughly believe that the scientific method is a path to enlightenment about nature and our existence

But the reality is that there could be no living science unless there was first a widespread conviction in the existence of an order of things, and, in particular, an order of Nature. Science could only have been created by mean who already had this belief, and therefore the original sources of the belief must have been pre-scientific.

This same pre-scientific beliefs is probably the reason for our age old deference to theology, and even back to our cave-dwelling forebears who believed that might inherit the strength of a beast by consuming it or adorning themselves in its flesh.