This article evaluates the concept of rationality in economics, psychology, and philosophy, suggesting a pluralistic model indicating distinct epistemological demands.
This article explores the ‘rationality wars’, contemporary debates about the nature and scope of rationality across economics, psychology, behavioral public policy and philosophy. It traces the evolution of the concept from classical thinkers and shows how modern disagreements – such as Daniel Kahneman’s logical model versus Gerd Gigerenzer’s ecological approach – restate long-standing philosophical tensions. These divergences arise from the distinct epistemological demands of each discipline. Using Gustavo Bueno’s distinction between concepts (discipline-specific) and ideas (transdisciplinary), the article critiques reductionist attempts to impose one framework as definitive. Instead, it argues for a pluralistic, scientifically grounded understanding of rationality that respects diverse aims, methods and standards.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alejandro Hortal (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: