The Rational Thinking Of Every Human Being

The decision making process includes cognitive processes that eventually lead to a choice in action while taking into consideration the alternative possibilities (Allen, Dorozenko, & Roberts, 2016). Not all choices have to lead to an action. The values and preferences of the person making the choice also comes into play when making the final decision. Problem-solving to obtain a certain goal or satisfactory by a solution is the main reason people go through the decision making process (Stefaniak, & Tracey, 2014). This process has many factors that end with one final result or solution. The decisions made can be rational or irrational and can be determined by explicit or tacit knowledge (Qingyao, Dongyu, & Weihua, 2016). Since the decision making process can be very difficult at time, psychologists have viewed the process in different perspectives to get a better understanding (Rossi, Picchi, Di Stefano, Marongiu, & Scarsini, 2015). The different perspectives include; psychological, cognitive, and normative or communicative rationality.

Every action a person takes is the result of having thought about what it is they think they should do and then doing it. Life is riddled with problems that require solving. Decisions are complex matters that require careful judgment and problem analysis especially when one is in a role where others look up to them and are affected by their decisions.

Human nature by essence has been the cause of many entrepreneurial paths, all follow to known the essence itself behind of what we conceive as life. Moreover it’s righteous description and abstract content, that many great man has humbly studied and that for centuries have made a path closely enough to the understanding of it, yet far from the light, it seems to be and unsolvable question that gives us a “Raison d'être” to our existence in this world.

Two phenomena- hindsight bias and judgmental overconfidence- illustrate why we can’t rely solely on intuition and common sense.

1. I agree with Melvin Konner when he said “People do not think or act rationally, even in their own self interest (944).” This can be seen in when people panic in high situations such as a fire. Recently, someone livestreaming, which is essentially a live recording of something, set his home on fire. Instead of thinking calm and rationally he attempted to put the fire out with other flammable materials.

Have you ever made a decision and later completely wonder why it is you made that decision? “Sway The Irresistible Pull of Irrational Behavior” by Ori Brafman and Rom Brafman examine moments of our lives where we could easily be swayed. The Brafmans discuss topics like commitment and value attribution. With examples of what attracts us into making a bad decision. The brilliant authors make it easy to understand the analyzations of the situations. Where there is a possibility of being swayed. With proper analyzation we can prevent these situations from taking place again. Almost everyone has made a decision we misunderstand and behind that decision is an irresistible pull of irrational behavior. No one is perfect, and no one can avoid being swayed into an irrational situation, not even me.

Our understanding of why flawed decisions are so common comes from work done by neuroscientists and decision scientists to understand how the brain works when faced with a set of circumstances that require a decision (Finkelstein, S., Whitehead, J., & Campbell, A. (2009).

When humans make a decision, it often turns out to be “predictably irrational” (Ariely, 2009). They always deviate systematically from expected decision rather show an inclination towards a certain way of thinking. This consistency of behavioral or decision bias can be very helpful to identify consequences or outcomes in a different

Economists have often modelled human decision makers as completely rational. According to this model, rational people know their own preferences, gather and accurately process all relevant information, and then make rational choices that advance their own interests. However, Herbert Simon won a Nobel Prize in economics by pointing out that people are rational, but only boundedly so in that they seldom gather all available information, they often do not accurately process the information

Trout; Bonkers, Lets take a look at the video. At 8 minutes, 14 seconds the truck begins to move forward. Reaching a speed at most 50 MPH. At 9 minutes 4 seconds he inters a wide left hand turn as he comes out of it at 9 minutes 13 seconds he see the road block. His brake lights come on. At 9 minutes 15 seconds he turns into the snow bank. If the road was dry it would take him 6 seconds to stop. The road looks dark- wet- so it would take him 7-8 second to stop. in two seconds he decided to take the ditch and not hit the three trucks in the road. Maybe killing himself and the others in the truck plus how many of the cops? Bonkers?There is a reason I was a police officers and you could never be one. Reason and common

Decision-making can be a cognitive process of selecting a course of action form various options. Some of us are logical. Some of us are risk taking. Either way such characteristics play a role in our decisions. In my experience decision-making can

Inadequate information, data, and knowledge. For rational decision-making to be accurate, reliable, and complete, information about various aspects of the problem under investigation is necessary. Possible future trends can be estimated with the help of such information. This facilitates rational decision-making. However, adequate and reliable information may not be available at the time of decision-making. As a result, the decisions may become defective or irrational or may prove faulty in the course of time. This is how decisions become irrational.

John Locke and Karl Marx have one thing in common, they both believe in human reasoning. Humans, they suppose, have the ability to be both rational and intellectual beings; they not only learn from those around them but also from their surroundings. Niccolo Machiavelli, however, disagrees with Locke and Marx. He argues that human beings are not reasonable and are chaotic without any such order. Although these three men differ drastically in their views on life and society, as a whole each became radicals that changed the world around them for centuries to come. Locke, Marx, and Machiavelli all based their beliefs on the views of the time period in which they lived and the influences that came with those eras.

Effective decision-making is very important on how probability can be applied therefore effective decision-making must be rational. As mentioned before, people who are deciding rationally are attempting to reach goals in a systematic way. They make sure

Parker’s budgeting decision is a good example of an individual acting with bounded rationality. This term was introduced by Simon in 1957 (as cited in Tolbert & Hall, 2008) to argue that normative models of decision making, which assume fully rational and objective judgement (Teale, Dispenza, Flynn & Currie, 2003), are unrealistic because human rationality is limited. Parker’s judgement may have seemed rational to him, but it was not rational for the organisation, a subtle distinction about rationality made by Storing (as cited in Tolbert & Hall, 2008). Parker’s judgement was also not rational in that he did not have all available knowledge and awareness of risk, which are the conditions of normative models (Teale et al, 2003) and the “official theory” of management (Anthony, as cited in Teale et al, 2003, p. 14). For example, Parker did not know about the variations in the terrain when he made his decision, and he also assumed that the assistant workers could work at the same physical rate that he could. Both of these limitations were factors resulting in a risk to on-time task completion.