As you pose this question under the subject Philosophy, I have
undertaken to find answers in that vein.
Philosophers would have you believe that there is a clear division
between reason and rationality (or at least there's a reason for
discussing such a division). Several papers online deal with the
distinction.
In a paper entitled "Reason and Rationality," for example, the authors
described three approaches to any discussion of reason: (1) the
descriptive approach, in which investigators study how people go about
the process of reasoning; (2) the normative approach, in which
philosophers try to establish standards for how people should reason
(that is, figuring out how people should reason rationally); and (3)
the evaluative approach, in which researchers look at the extent to
which individuals reason rationally. This scheme at least suggests
that people have reasons for making the decisions they make, but these
reasons are not necessarily rational. It also suggests that, while it
may be easy theoretically to draw the line between reason and
rationality, it may not be so simple in daily life.
[http://ruccs.rutgers.edu/ArchiveFolder/Research%20Group/Publications/Reason/ReasonRationality.htm]
Another paper explores the history of the dichotomy between reason
(nous in Greek, intellectus in Latin) and rationality (dianoia in
Greek, ratio in Latin) and concludes with an argument for the
perpetuation of the division. The author asserts, however, that how we
look at reason needs to be revised in order to incorporate the
thinking of modern philosophers. He suggests that we think of reason
as the way we reflect on our choices and think of rationality as the
concrete outcomes of those choices. In short, this author favors
blurring the line between the two, even to the extent of considering
them to be "different layers and functional modes of our reflective
activity." [http://141.35.2.84/welsch/Papers/reason.html]
Finally, an article entitled "Rethinking Rationality" notes that
"There is a venerable philosophical tradition that views human beings
as intrinsically rational, though even the most ardent defender of
this view would admit that under certain circumstances people's
decisions and thought processes can be very irrational indeed." Like
the comment already posted, these philosophers recognize that there
are circumstances where people sometimes act with reasons that have no
basis in rationality (e.g., when they're tired, drunk, angry, etc.).
They also suggest several readings that investigate the difference
between reasoning and judgment (rationality).
[http://ruccs.rutgers.edu/ArchiveFolder/Research%20Group/Publications/Rethink/rethink.html]
And speaking of books, here are two that provide a more detailed
exploration of the distinction between reasoning and rationality
(warning: as philosophical treatises/anthologies, they don't come
cheap):
Thinking and Deciding, by Jonathan Baron
[http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0521659728/qid=1036767643/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/103-3969181-9674208?v=glance&s=books]
Rational Choice in an Uncertain World, ed. by Reid Hastie and Robyn
Dawes [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/076192275X/ref=pd_bxgy_text_1/103-3969181-9674208?v=glance&s=books]
My Google Search Strategy: I used the search term reason versus
rationality, which yielded this result:
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=reason+versus+rationality.
Many of the pages discovered provide a less technical, less formal
discussion of the issue.
I hope this provides the answer you were looking for.
wherethereswill-ga |
