India Sentinels illustration. © India Sentinels 2025–2026
Recent research compels us to question whether rationality is always beneficial. Much like knowledge, rationality is often assumed to be inherently good. But just as we are warned against half knowledge – considered dangerous – we must also be cautious about what might be termed partial rationality.
Knowing only part of something, whether in business or technology, can lead to flawed decisions and misjudged truths. Similarly, incomplete or selectively applied rationality can undermine human endeavours in daily life.
The Classical Foundation
By definition, rationality suggests complete and coherent logical reasoning. Ancient thinkers embraced this ideal wholeheartedly. In the fifth century BCE, Socrates promoted rational inquiry, particularly among the youth. His student Plato recorded and expanded these ideas, while Plato’s own student Aristotle went on to define humans as rational animals.
For these early philosophers, human nature was viewed through the lens of integrated rationality. Dividing or limiting this faculty was inconceivable. They believed that fragmenting rationality would invite confusion, distortion and ultimately falsehood.
Modern Revelations
A striking insight has emerged from contemporary research. In a study published in Nature and reported in SciTech Daily, in July this year, researchers Marcelo G Mattar, Marcus K Benna and Li Ji-An challenged the conventional belief in human rationality.
Their findings reveal that people do not always make decisions based on objective reasoning. Instead, choices are shaped by personal factors: self-interest, past experience, biases, beliefs and the desire for reward. What appears rational to one person may seem irrational to another, depending on context.
Such divergence creates a clash of individual rationalities. These frictions lead to misunderstandings, strained relationships and sometimes even conflicts. It becomes increasingly clear that humans are not entirely rational beings – a recognition that illuminates not only interpersonal struggles but also broader historical and global tensions.
Read also: Escalating global tensions and how fallacious identities wreck humanity
The Rationality Clash in Everyday Life
Consider commonplace situations. In family life, parents may impose strict limits on screen time to protect their children from potential mental health issues arising from social media, especially content generated through artificial intelligence. This makes perfect sense from their perspective.
However, teenagers may view these restrictions as unreasonable, as they seek online interaction and learning. Both viewpoints are rational within their own frameworks, yet they collide.
In law enforcement, police officers follow legal rationale to enforce laws. But protestors may perceive their demonstrations for genuine demands as a rational effort to secure legitimate rights.
In contemporary hybrid workplaces, where some work remotely while others remain in the office, colleagues might form small, close-knit groups to feel supported and less isolated. This manifests contextual rationality as a natural response to the need for emotional connection.
However, this can exclude other colleagues, who feel hurt and want inclusion – equally rational given their inherent desire for belonging. This mismatch causes upset and divisions.
Read also: Present imperfect and future uncertain – blame it on Covid
Business and Global Implications
In the corporate world, companies may invest in artificial intelligence and automated systems to reduce costs and remain competitive. Though rational from an economic stance, such decisions often lead to significant job losses, sparking unrest among workforces.
Here too, both employers and the unemployed behave rationally within their own contexts, but the outcome is social and economic tension.
When scaled up to national levels, fragmented rationalities become even more disturbing. The ongoing wars in Eastern Europe and the Middle East reveal how catastrophic these realities can be.
One side may view its actions as a rational pursuit of regional or internal security, while the other deems its resistance equally rational in defence of identity and survival. These rigid and opposing positions result in violence, bloodshed and diminishing hope for peace.
If situations worsen to extremes, they evoke the concept of mutually assured destruction, epitomized by scenarios where all parties are prepared to risk ruin rather than concede defeat.
Read also: The World Summit at Null Island
The Odyssean Alternative
To move away from such apocalyptic paths, we need a shift towards what may be called Odyssean altruism.
In Homer’s Odyssey, the hero Odysseus faces the challenge of safely guiding himself and his men past the island of the Sirens – half-woman, half-bird creatures whose enchanting songs lure sailors to their deaths.
Knowing the danger, Odysseus acts with foresight. He orders his men to plug their ears with beeswax so they cannot hear the deadly music. Simultaneously, he instructs them to bind him firmly to the ship’s mast, allowing him to experience the temptation without acting on it.
In doing so, he ensures that not only he himself, but all aboard make it through the peril unharmed.
This tale offers a powerful model for our times. Individuals and groups must adopt similar wisdom. To protect everyone – friends and strangers alike – we must foster humanistic disposition, dispel misunderstandings in times of strife and facilitate open dialogue as well as exchange of viewpoints to achieve common consensus.
Reducing bias and prejudice can lead to meeting of minds and formation of unified purpose. When these goals are accepted by all, they become universally rational, moving beyond the limits of personal or situational rationality.
Encouraging flexibility in thought and action helps replace rigidity with forgiveness and compromise. It allows people to adapt their decisions in ways that synchronize with others, strengthening the bonds that hold families, societies and nations together.
The Path Forward
These qualities, rooted in altruism and empathy, offer a trajectory forward. By nurturing them, individuals can contribute to a more collective and humane approach to thinking, planning and acting.
This transition from relative understanding to shared rationality may well be the key to lasting safety, security and peace for humanity. In our interconnected world, the choice between fragmented rationalities and collective wisdom has never been more crucial.
The question remains: will we bind ourselves to the mast of shared understanding, or succumb to the siren call of isolated rationalism?
Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article are the author’s own and don’t necessarily reflect the views of India Sentinels.
Follow us on social media for quick updates, new photos, videos, and more.
X: https://twitter.com/indiasentinels
Facebook: https://facebook.com/indiasentinels
Instagram: https://instagram.com/indiasentinels
YouTube: https://youtube.com/indiasentinels
© India Sentinels 2025-26
