Many students and professionals in philosophy or mathematics, myself included, find themselves in a quandary in their haphazard opportunities to self-describe. They might hesitate to put it in writing, or they might feel proud in doing so – but it rarely leaves them untouched. What some hesitate and others boast in is, for lack of a better word, loving logic and critical thinking. Being passionate about getting an argument right, feeling discomfort at the sight of poor or fallacious reasoning, feeling shame at having produced one oneself, feeling delight at unweaving a tightly packed argument that turns out to be spotless.
What kind of a disposition to feel is this?
What usually passes for an epistemic feeling (“Aha!” moments, feeling certain, feeling unsure, etc.) usually have specific objects: something prompts our insight, certainty or doubt. In contrast, and without making any grand claims about what it’s like to enjoy an argument in general, it seems that enjoying this or that argument have a lot in common, in point of the joy we get out of the activity. I need to think more about this, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.