Definition: Here is the Collin's definition for "Rational decisions": Rational decisions and thoughts are based on reason rather than on emotion.

Where this post is coming from:

1. Recently:
   Revolut, a neo-bank, changed their Brand design for their 10 years anniversary. As I was scrolling through their sub-reddit, I noticed a lot of people complaining virulently about the new Logo. The most upvoted comment of one of them was the following: "It's beyond me why people would get so upset about a bank's logo."
2. Some years ago:
   After staying in a job for about 6 years, I was doing interviews. In my previous job, I had reached a managing position after starting as a basic junior dev.
   During an interview, I was explaining to the guy that although my previous job was interesting, it was getting me away from what I liked (coding), and that although staying would have gotten me further up the management ladder, it didn't feel right for me to stay there. I added that 6 years was long enough for me to stay in a single company and that I wanted to explore a new product, to start learning again, and just to code more.
   Then his response unsettled me.
   He said: "I don't buy it. You could have been paid more and gained more responsibility just staying there. This is irrational. You're hiding something."
   I paused for a moment as I didn't expect this. I could have doubled down arguing why the decision made sense to me, but somehow this changed my state of mind to "I never want to work for this guy". And so instead of trying to convince him, I answered: "If you think people make rational decisions, you're terribly mistaken. They try to make up rational explanations for their actions when they mostly just act based on their feelings".

Where I'm at now:

"People usually make decisions based on emotions. Thus, decisions are mostly irrational"

This is what I believe with what I've been given: The materials I've come across over the years and the interactions I've had with people. Some of the materials I've come across include:

1. Ethica, by Baruch Spinoza: In this book, Spinoza sets out the thesis that people are naturally "passive". This, he explains, means that what we call "free will" is, at first, an illusion. People think they decide freely because they are ignorant of the causes that affects them and influence their thought process. He explains those causes are translated into emotions that then make people act based upon them. Spinoza's main thesis is that people are incapable of being rational as long as they ignore the causes that affects them, and that free will is something that has to be conquered by learning what our determinisms are. This is the only way to understand why we believe what we believe, and to open our decisions to options that we would naturally not have considered.
2. Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain, by António Rosa Damásio: Antonio D. is a Portuguese-American neuroscientist, currently the Chair in Neuroscience, as well as Professor of Psychology, Philosophy, and Neurology, at the University of Southern California. In this book, he explains how the recent discoveries in Neurosciences and Psychology are giving showing that the thesis Spinoza made in Ethica 400 years ago seems to be true.

Am I necessarily right? Of course not. I could be wrong, and I aware of it. Those elements are not enough to make a definitive statement. There might be more compelling evidences out there that people are mostly rational and that emotions have little effects on decision-making, even if that goes against my belief and my experience of life, and I would just not have stumbled upon these evidences up to now.

Now, why does this thesis appeal to me?

1. I believe conficts are mostly a net loss to society. (And yes, this is a very biased statement based on my very own experience of life and conflicts)
2. I believe conflicts are mostly caused by people hanging on to their opinions because they are firmly convinced they cannot be wrong, and that the counterparty is either dishonest or stupid.
3. The belief that you are necessarily right because you're rational makes you impervious to different point of views. It pushes you to adopt a firm stance. And I believe It dumbs you down by preventing you from improving your reasoning.

​

To conclude this post, I would say I believe If people would accept their innate flaw in rationality, Society would be less polarized and less violent, and that the world would generally be a better place.

Thanks for reading, and I'm looking forward to read from you guys.