It's interesting in the context of what I've already said about appeals to
reason not really being enough to change things that you put your argument in
Kantian terms.
My summary understanding of Kant's philosophy is that it is based on the
belief that reason is (or should be) the basis for moral action.
My encyclopedia search came up with, "In the Metaphysics of Ethics
(1797) Kant described his ethical system, which is based on a belief that the
reason is the final authority for morality. Actions of any sort, he believed,
must be undertaken from a sense of duty dictated by reason."
In contrast I've argued, that even when one is being flawlessly reasonable, one
still has to compete against other ideologies and whatever else is fuelling them.
Previously I went on to say that people, by and large, do not do things
like, for example, giving up smoking for ideological reasons.
I need to revise this statement. It's not strictly true and it's not
really what I want to say.
Many people do indeed attempt to give up smoking based on (rational)
understanding of the harmful effects. And some of them may even succeed.
However, the point that I really want to emphasise is that it's more the case
that people do not do things like start (and continue) smoking
for ideological reasons. This is why appeals to reason are a limited
counter-force.
In the case of smoking, where we are talking about something now recognised
as one of the most addictive drugs known to us, this is perhaps too
obvious an example. It's more than a single influence. Factors
such as alcohol, caffeine and television all contribute to varying degrees,
and in many ways the more subtle and ambient influences are even trickier
precisely because we take them so for granted. But the fact of
their existence and the extent of their influence is why I believe appeals to
reason alone are not enough of a counter-force.
It's almost counter-intuitive to suppose that yet other substances (what those
outside the experience might call a 'drug') could be the antidote. It
defies our conventional reasoning. But, with the emphasis instead on the
felt presence of immediate experience, going beyond our conventional
reasoning is perhaps the crux of what being a plant-person is all about.