The Irrationality of the Rational and the Rationality of the Irrational

Introduction

The concept of Rationality in Jungian dichotomies is represented by Judging and Perceiving, which describe how individuals approach the world. Judging types tend to be structured and decisive, while Perceiving types are more flexible and open to change.

However, in practice, this definition is often confused with the Logic/Ethics dichotomy. Interestingly, Logic is frequently misinterpreted as Rationality in this context.

In this article, I propose a perspective on the Rationality/Irrationality dichotomy where these concepts are examined solely in relation to one another. The entire scale can then be referred to as Rationality.

Main Hypothesis

The hypothesis of this study posits that an individual's Rationality is determined by their “horizon of planning” or, in other words, the scope of observable phenomena.

When the scope of observation is broad, decision-making involves a greater number of factors compared to an individual with a narrower scope of perception. Thus, the quantity and quality of attention become key determinants in the Rationality/Irrationality dichotomy.

Everyone may perceive themselves as rational, and rightfully so. However, an individual with access to greater information and the ability to collect and analyze it will perceive others, operating on fewer parameters, as irrational.

This highlights an important point: the Rationality/Irrationality dichotomy is relative and depends on a person’s capacity to expand their horizon of perception and incorporate more factors into their analysis.

These differences can be mathematically expressed by translating the volume and quality of information into formulas for decision-making processes.

Intermediate conclusion: Irrationals focus on quick decisions, acting on "here and now." In contrast, Rationals dedicate time to analyzing and identifying the optimal moment for action.

Therefore, Rationality and Irrationality should be viewed as properties of an individual's actions rather than static traits.

Rationality and Irrationality as Properties of Action

Rationality and Irrationality are better understood as properties of an individual’s actions rather than static characteristics of personality.

Irrationality is reflected in quick decision-making without lengthy analysis of large datasets. Irrationals are inclined to "dive in," relying on intuition or basic information.

Rationality, on the other hand, involves dedicating time to gathering and analyzing data to identify the optimal solution or moment for action.

Both approaches have limitations. Irrationals, by avoiding prolonged analysis, may make mistakes due to insufficient data, but they benefit from speed in decision-making. Rationals, while striving for complete information, risk missing the moment for action since perfect information is unattainable.

Hence, the Rationality/Irrationality dichotomy describes decision-making strategies rather than the personalities themselves:

• Irrationals act in conditions of limited information.
• Rationals aim to consider as many factors as possible before acting.

Consequently, the breadth of an individual’s planning horizon determines which property of action dominates in a given situation.

4. The Irrationality of the Rational and the Rationality of the Irrational

It is important to recognize that in real life, it is impossible to gather all the information needed to make a perfect decision. There is always an element of chance, unforeseen circumstances, or external factors that cannot be predicted.

Thus, even the most rational person, meticulously analyzing data, is eventually forced to stop gathering information, take a breath, and "dive in." This moment often becomes the point of irrationality in the behavior of a rational individual.

On the other hand, an irrational person, acting quickly and impulsively, may achieve success because their decisions sometimes "hit the target" faster than a rational person’s. In situations with limited time or resources, such actions can appear more rational.

Examples of the Interaction Between Two Strategies:

• Rationality of the Irrational: An irrational individual, relying on intuition or experience, can make a decision that, in retrospective analysis, turns out to be correct. In situations with limited time or data, this can be an optimal strategy.
• Irrationality of the Rational: A rational individual, striving to account for all possible parameters, may miss the moment for action, making their strategy less effective.

Historical Examples

• Irrationality of the Rational — the Planning of the Titanic: The creators of the Titanic meticulously designed the ship, paying attention to every parameter to make it "unsinkable." Their rationality was so dominant that they deemed accidents impossible and reduced the number of lifeboats to the minimum required. However, they failed to account for random factors and human error, which ultimately made their decision irrational in the real-world scenario.
• Rationality of the Irrational — Intuitive Decisions of Military Leaders: History provides many examples where military commanders like Alexander the Great or Napoleon made decisions intuitively, relying not on prolonged calculations but on their instincts. Their actions were often perceived as irrational, yet such "sudden" moves ensured strategic victories that were later analyzed as entirely rational and justified.

Examples from Business

• Irrationality of the Rational — Overanalyzing the Market: Companies aiming to enter a new market sometimes spend too much time conducting marketing research, analyzing competitors, and trying to account for all risks. During this time, the market can change, and competitors can seize opportunities, making such excessive planning irrational. Example: Kodak spent too long hesitating before adopting digital technologies, which caused it to lose its market share.
• Rationality of the Irrational — Startups and Quick Decisions: Many successful startups, like Facebook or Airbnb, began with intuitive decisions that were not based on extensive calculations or analysis. Founders bet on ideas that seemed promising "here and now." Later, their actions were justified as rational, but at the initial stage, they appeared risky and even irrational.

History, business, and personal experience demonstrate that rationality and irrationality are not fixed categories. The irrationality of the rational manifests when excessive planning leads to missed opportunities for action. The rationality of the irrational arises in situations where intuitive, spontaneous decisions turn out to be the most effective. These examples highlight the dynamic and intertwined nature of the two strategies, making the dichotomy of "Rationality/Irrationality" far more complex than it seems at first glance.

5. Case Study: Salaries in Southeast Asia

While hiring employees in one of the Southeast Asian countries, I encountered an intriguing example that illustrates the Rationality/Irrationality dichotomy through the lens of planning horizons.

Employees were given a choice: to receive their salary monthly, bi-monthly, weekly, or daily. Out of ten employees, nine chose daily payouts, and only one opted for weekly payments.

Interpretation of the Choice

• Rationality of the Employees: For the employees, choosing daily payouts was logical. It allowed them to meet immediate basic needs, minimize financial risks, and avoid debt. In a context of economic instability or low income, this approach appears entirely reasonable.
• Irrationality from a Long-Term Perspective: However, the daily payout format makes saving and even medium-term planning nearly impossible. This approach contributes to financial vulnerability and traps employees in a cycle of short-term decisions.

Comparison with Other Cultures

Cultural and social factors play a significant role in shaping planning horizons and perceptions of rationality.

• Western Countries: In countries with high economic stability, such as the United States or Germany, employees typically choose monthly salaries. This is rooted in a culture of saving and long-term planning, which is perceived as a rational approach. Short-term payouts are often associated with a lack of financial discipline.
• Southeast Asia: In countries with economic instability or low income levels, many individuals have a planning horizon limited to short-term tasks. Choosing daily pay is perceived as rational because it satisfies immediate needs. This behavior is influenced by cultural and social factors, such as the high value placed on immediate gratification and collective responsibility (e.g., supporting family members).
• Northern Countries: In Scandinavian countries, such as Sweden or Norway, rationality is often linked to collective welfare and long-term planning. Cultural norms and social safety nets encourage more forward-looking financial decisions. People are inclined to save and plan ahead, reducing the necessity for frequent payouts.

6. Conclusions

• Rationality and Irrationality as Properties of Action: The Rationality/Irrationality dichotomy is not fixed and is defined not only by individual personality traits but also by context, planning horizons, and external circumstances.
• Planning Horizon as a Core Criterion:
  • A broad planning horizon involves considering more factors and conducting thorough analysis, which defines rationality.
  • A narrow horizon leads to quick and intuitive decisions, which align with irrationality.
• Interpenetration of Rationality and Irrationality:
  • Absolute rationality is unattainable in real life, as there is always an element of randomness and data limitations.
  • Irrational actions can become rational in conditions of limited time or resources, while rational strategies often include irrational moments when intuition-driven decisions are necessary.
• Impact of Cultural and Social Factors: Cultural norms and social conditions shape dominant decision-making strategies, as seen in the differences in planning horizons between countries and societies.

7. Final Thoughts

The Rationality/Irrationality dichotomy is traditionally perceived as a clear division. However, the proposed approach demonstrates that these concepts exist only in relation to one another and describe properties of actions rather than fixed characteristics of personality.

Rationality is defined by the breadth of the planning horizon, while irrationality manifests in a tendency for swift actions. However, both approaches are intertwined: a rational individual inevitably exhibits elements of irrationality under uncertainty, while an irrational individual can intuitively make strategically sound decisions.

Examples from history, business, and personal experience illustrate how this dichotomy manifests in real life. Different cultures and social conditions shape their unique perceptions of rationality, which is especially evident in the variations of planning horizons.

Prospects for Further Research:

• Mathematical modeling of the dichotomy based on the volume and quality of data used in decision-making.
• Studying the influence of cultural and integral types on rationality and irrationality across societies.
• Developing practical recommendations for effective interactions with individuals who have varying planning horizons.

The proposed perspective on the dichotomy opens new opportunities for its understanding and application, especially in areas such as psychology, sociology, and management.