Abstract
In the works of Max Weber alone, one may come across more than a dozen meanings of rational. The term can be easily replaced by terms like logical consistency, empirical proof, critical attitude, effectiveness, optimization, and many others (Bunge 1987). Does the abundance of connotations imply that there is no real problem of rationality? Is it in fact meaningless to speak about the concept of rationality? Should we prefer to avoid the term? This problem-situation is the background of numerous recent studies on rationality in the fields of sociology and related disciplines (Agassi and Jarvie 1987; Barry and Hardin 1982; Genov 1986a; Hindess 1988; Kizima 1985; Lash and Whimster 1987; Schnadelbach 1984). The common message of the studies is that the available concepts are not differentiated and systematic enough to cover this complex subject. I will argue that the concept of rationality as a coherent, univocal idea which bears on practice should not be abandoned; rather, it needs to be replaced by an adequately multi-dimensional concept.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
