Western philosophy has long had an obsession with passion and what we should do about it. In an allegory in Plato's 'Phaedrus', Socrates portrays our passions as an unruly horse - in danger of dragging the chariot of our soul off of it's divine course. Aristotle advocates a cycle of control and catharsis to aid our ability to keep passion on reason's leash. Epictetus and Spinoza show us how to use reason to take the wind out of passion's sails, and the Romantic era's artists and philosophers advocate the very valorization of our passions over our rationality. The list goes on.
This dialectic between reason and passion has become a foundational part of our philosophical and ethical discourse. Perhaps, however, the dichotomy itself demands examining in its own right. After all, Wittgenstein and Kant show us that reason itself is not infallible, and Plato and Aristotle in their discussions of emotional education present our passions as parts of us that, though unruly, can be shaped and trained. Is it possible to think of ourselves not as two warring factions, but as a multi-faceted whole - many facets of which can be cultivated and refined? Or would speaking this way somehow rob our discourse of something that we hold dear?