How Our Lives Are Shaped by Rationality - Essay Example

How Our Lives are Shaped by Rationality Introduction Rationality is the aspect of being reasonable in respect to some given facts or reason. It usually involves correspondence of a person’s beliefs to their actions and the reason for their actions. In many cases, people usually base their actions on what they consider to be rational. Rationality underlies formation of values by people, lifestyles and social norms, change and identification in groups. People act rationally by identifying their interests within the limitation of their experience. The hindrance to making rational choices therefore is the personal rigidities that arise from various traits and habits. Rationality is related to the perspectives that are useful in changing environmental and personal situations and these perspectives are humanistic perspectives, social behavior and constructionist, developmental, conflict, systems, psychodynamic and rational choice perspective. People determine and make choices of the appropriate values and norms to observe using rationality. Human beings as rational creatures do not just act depending on their preferences but based on values that are rationally determined. Many of their actions are geared towards striving to survive and even in this case, the struggle to survive is a control to limit the extent of natural instincts as they strive to survive. These limits are determined rationality. Rationality is therefore related to the survival of the human species and the intelligence of human beings. Rationality is therefore a part of human life and extends to the actions of people in their day to day lives, their religion, art, science and technology. The question of how our lives are shaped by rationality therefore will be answered in the paper (Alexander, 2003). How our lives are shaped by rationality Several theories give an explanation of how our lives are shaped by rationality and in this respect the rational choice theory indicates how rationality forms the basis of social analysis. The theory argues that there is a degree of rationality in every human behavior. In this case, rationality is regarded as being applicable in a noneconomic phenomenon whereby people use it to make decisions concerning their behavior and lifestyle. People become rational to do what is best suited for their life and these actions have their basis on values and beliefs that are held by the people. The values and beliefs as well are formed on the basis of what is rational. The assumption of the fact that the actions of others are rational is what qualifies their actions as being able to make sense in the other people’s perspectives. The theory also argues that people act rationally when they choose the actions that best suits their interest and when they make an optimal choice in a given set of goals and objectives. This is the argument for substantive rationality while that of procedural rationality takes the mind frame perspective. This theory therefore argues that the life of the lives of human beings is shaped by rationality considering that their decision making depends on rationality and determination of what choices they take depends on what they perceive as being rational (Dillon, 2010). Weberian theory of rationalization is another argument that shows how rationality shapes our lives. Marx Weber in the theory acknowledges bureaucracy as an example of rationalization in the society. He views that bureaucracy has been increased by fast food restaurants that are present all around the world and this aspect is explained under society McDonaldisation. This theory defines four types of rationalitywhich include practical rationality. This according to weber determines the activities that people undertake every day and this is considered as the determiner of their interests in the world. Practical rationality as defined by weber is in consistence with the rational choice theory which concerns people’s actions and activities being aimed to their interests. In determining their activities, people usually weigh several alternatives and choose the best that will lead them to attaining of their interests. This type of rationality is usually applied by people when solving the problems that they encounter in their daily lives. The second type of rationalization as stated in the theory is theoretical rationality and this has a cognitive perspective of rationality. It focuses on trying the causal attributes and tries to derive and attribute symbolic meanings. It aims at giving meaning to events in the world that appear to be hazardous in the world that the people live. This aspect differentiates it from practical rationality that is based on actions that people undertake in everyday lives (Alexander, 2003). Substantive rationality is another type recognized in the theory and this involves the values that guide people in their everyday lives. The values especially act as a guide when the people are determining the actions that they should take to get to their desired ends. The values observed by individuals are termed as being rational if they show consistency with some other values that are set by a specified group of people. This type of rationality according to Weber has links to economic actions whose rationality is determined by the level to which people in a certain group adhere to some set values. The approach of getting to the end according to substantive rationality is dependent on some set values that determine what means to be applied. Formal rationality is the fourth rationality type whereby the means to the end is determined by rules and regulations that are universally set. This type of rationality is formed upon structures such as capitalist economics, modern law and bureaucracy. These structures and their corresponding rules and laws are what determine the appropriate means to end. People in this case do not choose on what methods to use but rely on already predetermined methods which limit their choice of actions. It usually disregards the importance of substantive rationality since it does not consider the applicable values when determining the means to the end. Economic systems are an example of formal rationality whereby values of the involved parties are not regarded. Formal rationality has more focus on attaining profits rather than on meeting the needs of the people that are involved. It therefore results to a disregard of the humanity concept (In Turner, 2001). Formally rational economic systems are relevant in our lives since entrepreneurs and other business stakeholders follow the set rules and systems when conducting businesses in order to attain the desired economic benefits which in many cases are profits. Operations in the market systems are not usually based on the ethical perspective but are mainly based on the struggle to survive in these markets for attainment of the highest profit. This as well applies to the labourers in the labour markets where the economic systems are formally rational, the entrepreneurs tend to overwork them therefore compromising their human values. Formal rationality influences the operations in areas where industrialization has taken place. This type of rationality involves people who follow rules without having regard on the human values involved. The theory still links rationalization to bureaucracy and therefore coming up with bureaucratic rationalization. This is associated with revolutions that take place in the lives of people, beginning with social orders and heading to the people, changing and defining their adaptations to meet the requirements of attaining the means to the end. It furthers the development of personalities and professional expertise in individuals. This is reflected in our lives in the cases where the expert personalities occupy the high levels in the hierarchy, set rules and regulation that the lower personnel in the hierarchy use to determine the appropriate methods of attaining the set objectives. In this way therefore, bureaucracy links to formal rationalization and therefore takes part in shaping lives in the business organisations (Dillon, 2010). Bureaucracy is aimed at enabling people to attain the means to the end and this is done through setting rules and regulations that need to be observed. They therefore in some way, tend to force people to acting in some way in order to attain means to the end. The tasks developed in bureaucracy are then broken down and assigned to different employees who are expected to use them in attaining the set goals. The performance of these tasks is based on adherence of the rules set. Bureaucracy is the determinant of formal rationalization in the bureaucratic systems and therefore it satisfies the concept that rationality shapes our lives with the applicable type in this case being formal rationality. Operations as well as the results in the organisations that observe bureaucratic systems are usually predictable due to the adherence of the same rules and regulations. Employees get to ensure that they get tasks done in a certain way without deviations from the set way. The organisations involved get to attain the means to the end in a certain predetermined way that is optimal. Weber also states that bureaucracy is a rational cage that contained a large number of people. This cage as he described is one that people do not easily come out once they are in it and he foresees a future where people in the entire society will become rationalized in the organisations where they operate under bureaucracy (In Turner, 2001). Formal rationalization therefore has been more observed in the modern day society than it was in the days of Weber. This is observed in many fast food restaurants with McDonald leading in the line for observance of bureaucracy and therefore adhering to formal rationalization. The observance of bureaucratic principles by McDonald has resulted to the process of McDonaldization. This process is aimed at insisting on the expanded formal rationalization as a result of high rate of bureaucracy in the fast food restaurants. Leading in the observance of bureaucracy in fast food restaurants, McDonald shows components of formal rationalization which are predictability, efficiency, and control through substituting technology for human, quantification and formal rationality’s irrationality. Formal rationality has been extending and expanding in the fast food restaurants for decades since it was first noted. This therefore is an indication that it has continually dominated the society in its penetration into the fast food restaurants. The fact that this expansion has extended to different parts of the world show that formal rationalization has been playing a part in shaping lives and its success in doing so is what causes the continued expansion. The expansion has started taking place in schools, colleges and hospitals and this shows the continued increase of formal rationalization. Many other businesses are also coming up to operate under the principles observed in these fast food restaurants and this is an indication that formal rationalization is taking continually taking place even in other areas and fields other than the fast foods industry (Alexander, 2003). There has also been emergence of a number of social phenomena that are evidently an expansion of McDonaldization and these still indicate that the principles of formal rationalization are still expanding. The elements of rationalization are also becoming increasingly evident in the society in various ways. Efficiency as one of the elements which emphasizes on choosing an optimum means to the end whereby the consumers are expected to stand in the line and make their orders. Other firms have also adopted this by ensuring that consumers are engaged to work in similar ways as they buy the goods. Calculability also involves emphasizing on things that are easy to calculate or that are quantifiable and this has been observed in fast food restaurants over a period of time. Expansion of this has also occurred in other business settings with their emphasis starting to lie on quantity rather than quality. The aspect of predictability is also increasing in different areas with people yearning to know what outcome they expect in different circumstances. Replacement of people activities to utilizing technology is also increasing with many firms in different sectors shifting to the use of technology and minimizing on the use of labourers (Dillon, 2010). Conclusion In conclusion, there are several ways of showing that our lives are shaped by rationality. As the paper has discussed, the rational choice theory is one way which insists on the rationality of our actions. Weberian theory of rationalization is another way and this leads to the McDonaldization theory. The rationalization theory by Weber gives four types of rationality which are formal, theoretical, substantive and practical rationality which further shows how rationality shapes our lives. Reference list Alexander, J. C. (2003). The Meanings of Social Life: A Cultural Sociology. New York: Oxford University Press. Dillon, M. (2010). Introduction to sociological theory: Theorists, concepts, and their applicability to the twenty-first century. Chichester, U.K: Wiley-Blackwell. In Turner, J. H. (2001). Handbook of sociological theory. New York: Springer. Read More