Irrational Rationalism And Rational Irrationalism - How Leaders Should Look At Different Types Of Knowledge

Recently I've been reading through texts from both Freud and Jung, which has been an interesting experience.

For those who have not heard of them, you could say that they are some of the Forefathers of Psychology.

Freud and Jung at one time worked together, but due to disputes over approaches, they split into different schools.

As I was researching some of their Ideas, and discussions around those Ideas, I found an interesting opinion about these two Individuals and their approaches to Psychology.

(PS - I won't debate whether this quote is Correct or Incorrect about these Psychological Forefathers, especially as there is a definite bias that should become apparent)

"One is tempted to characterize Jung as a supremely rational anti-rationalist, while Freud could be called a very irrational rationalist." - Stephan A. Hoeller

Regardless of what you believe about these Psychologists and their works, this is a Fascinating Concept.

Rational Anti-Rationality (similar to Irrationality).

Irrational Rationality.

What do these even mean?

Then, what does that mean for us as Leaders?

Well, all of these terms - Rationality, Anti-Rationality, and Irrationality - are all ways of looking at Types of Knowledge.

A Rationalist is someone whose Primary Source of Knowledge is Reason.

An Anti-Rationalist would be the exact opposite, someone who is Actively Against the Idea that Reason should be Used as a Primary Source of Knowledge.

What would the Anti-Rationalist use as a "Primary Source of Knowledge" Instead?

They would say that we should seek Emotions, Intuition, or Religion as a Primary Source of Knowledge Instead.

Then what about the Irrationalist?

The Irrationalist would say that Reason is simply not the "Best" or "Only" way to Access Knowledge and would Prioritize a different source of Knowledge.

This now brings us to "Irrational Rationalist" and "Rational Anti-Rationalist".

The Intended Meaning here is that an Irrational Rationalist would use "Reason" as their Primary Knowledge, but in ways that are Not Logical or Reasonable.

The Rational Anti-Rationalist on the other hand would use another Primary Source of Knowledge (Emotion, Intuition, Religion, etc.), but does so in a way that at the end of the day is Logical and Reasonable.

Now that I've thoroughly confused you, let's look at this in Practice.

Do we see these things Play out in the World?

Absolutely!

For Instance, a Fantastic Example of "Irrational Rationality" would be the Failed Return-To-Office "Mandates" that have been Ignored and which have Forced Leaders to Backtrack and Admit were... say it with me...

Irrational.

There "Were" Theoretically "Rational Reasons" that Leaders gave as to Why People should Return to the Office, such as the Loneliness Epidemic and the concept of Group Flow.

Yet, Reality "Overwhelming" Proved these Mandates would "Never" Have Worked because of One Major Problem - Burnout.

Burnout was what made those "Rational Reasons" Completely Irrational in Reality.

Which brings us to something Really Interesting as Leaders.

"Burnout", as well as other things around concepts of "Wellness" and "Wellbeing", generally would not be considered "Rational" Reasons to Change Business Practices.

Why would a Business Leader "Care" about how People "Feel" and Make Bottom-Line Decisions based on that?

Why does Work-Life Balance Matter to Productivity?

How does Purpose Lead to Profitability?

These would be considered "Irrational" because it is based on "Emotions".

However, when we look at "Rational" Data around Burnout alone, we can easily see that Burnout Decreases Productivity Potential to 5% or Less.

This means that what 1 Person "Should" Accomplish on their own would require 20 People in Burnout or More to Accomplish.

When 80% of Employees are in Burnout, with more on their way, Leaders are in a Dire Situation when it comes to Productivity.

That Data Point would be considered a very "Rational" Reason to make an "Irrational" Decision to Focus on Burnout.

You could say that Burnout is a Very Rational Irrational thing to Focus on Solving as a Leader.

Now, does this give us an answer to Which Perspective we should Seek as Leaders?

Well, not exactly.

It "Is" Great to have Rational Reasons in making Business Decisions.

If we look at Entrepreneurship, "Many" Ideas and Businesses Fail because the Entrepreneurs Acted "Irrationally" to a Fault - Ignoring Debts or Failing to See when Products/Services Lose Money.

We also Frequently See Leaders make "Horrible" Decisions based on Rational Data Alone, which is a large part of the Reason I've Said that the Role of CEO is Dead.

If we look at History, we have also seen Leaders do Horrendous Things based on all of these - Reason, Emotion, Intuition, and even Religion.

The Communists and Nazis have done Atrocious things based on Reason Alone.

Every Major Religion has had Horrible Stories of Massacres based on Religion (Even "Non-Violent" Religions like Buddhism Have Committed Massacres).

There are also Countless Stories of Leaders whose Emotions Caused Tragedies, and whose Intuitions were Terribly Wrong.

One could easily say that there are Equally as many Positive Things that have Occurred "Because" of all of these types of Knowledge.

So where should we stand as Leaders?

Rational?

Irrational?

I think this is the Wrong Question.

What the question Fails to Understand is that "All" of these - Reason, Emotion, Intuition, and even Religion - are different types of "Knowledge".

All Knowledge can be Used in Positive and Negative Ways, and can both Help or Hinder our Goals.

Instead of being Extremist and Believing only "One" Type of Knowledge should Triumph, maybe we should Accept "All" Types of Knowledge.

The Reality is that "Sometimes" Rational Knowledge "Is" Essential, but other times Irrational Knowledge "Reveals" things we Cannot "Rationally" Understand Yet.

Wisdom comes with making the Best Decisions based on "All" of the Knowledge Currently Available.

Will it be Perfect?

Absolutely Not.

But will We be Better Off as Leaders if we Look at "All" of the Available Knowledge First?

Significantly Better Off.

Knowledge is Only Useful if we Understand It and then Use It.

If we Do Not Understand the Reasoning, Emotions, or Intuitions we have, we will Fail to Use Them.

But the Better we Understand the Reasoning, Emotions, and Intuitions we have, the Better we can Use Them as Leaders.

The Better We Use Them, the More Success We Will Have.

The More Success We Have, the Faster We Will Get To Our Goals.