Objective Rationality: What Is Rational to You May Not Be Rational to Others

[DISCLAIMER]

I recently attended a session with client X, who apparently contemplated that I’d validate this individual’s beliefs regarding a matter of disagreement with another individual, as I thought of a psychoeducational lesson on Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) at the time.

Before going further, it may be useful to define terms. When referring to thoughts or beliefs which are “rational,” I’m referencing those cognitive elements which remain in accordance with both logic and reason. For clarity, I stated of this distinction in Tragedy of the Commons:

Here, “logic” is the interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable, and “reason” is a statement offered in explanation or justification. For instance, a modus ponens syllogism uses the following logical form: If p, then q; p; therefore, q.

If continuation of the human species is the foremost concern for humanity (p), then forced breeding absolutely must be required (q). Continuation of the human species is the foremost concern for humanity (p). Therefore, forced breeding absolutely must be required (q).

Although this moral and ethical proposition follows logical form, I argue that this sort of moral absolutism isn’t reasonable. Thus, I consider this syllogistic belief as that relating to irrationality. Nevertheless, I have little doubt that at least one person on this planet disagrees with my outlook.

Noteworthy, my worldview is subjective (characteristic of or belonging to reality as perceived rather than as independent of mind). Thus, not everyone agrees with what everybody else deems as rational or not. No matter how you may’ve been misled, not everyone is equal in our outlook.

In consideration of this context, it’s worth noting that the American Psychological Association (APA) defines “objective” as “having verifiable existence in the external world, independently of any opinion or judgment.” For example, it’s objectively true that everyone will one day die.

This is a statement based on “rationality,” which the APA defines as “the quality of being reasonable or rational or of being open to reason” and “a rational action, belief, or desire.” Given this understanding, I now present the REBT tool I recently used with client X.

REBT uses the ABC model to illustrate that when an undesirable Action occurs and you Believe an unhelpful narrative about the event, it’s your unfavorable assumption, not the occurrence itself, that causes an unpleasant Consequence. This is known as distress or disturbance.

In particular, there are four predominate irrational beliefs which people often use to upset themselves: global evaluations, low frustration tolerance, awfulizing, and demandingness. When contemplating these unproductive beliefs, think of the acronym GLAD.

Additionally, from a psychological standpoint, people distress or disturb themselves using a Belief-Consequence (B-C) connection. Of course, this isn’t to suggest that in the context of the naturalistic or physical world there is no Action-Consequence (A-C) connection.

For instance, from an A-C viewpoint, if you begin to experience a permanent cessation of all vital functions (Action), then you may die (Consequence). However, from a B-C view, you may self-distress (e.g., worry) or self-disturb (e.g., terror) with unfavorable Beliefs about dying.

As an example, you experience vital complications (Action) and Believe, “Life is meaningless, if it ends in death [G], and I can’t tolerate dying [L], because it’s so horrible [A] that it mustn’t ever happen [D]!” With that unaccommodating script, you then endure terror (Consequence).

Addressing how people upset themselves with unhelpful attitudes, the ABC model incorporates Disputation of unproductive philosophies of life in order to explore Effective new beliefs. Whereas rigid beliefs cause self-disturbance, flexible beliefs result in an un-disturbed condition.

If you comprehend how the B-C connection causes unpleasant outcomes, then I invite you to consider “objective rationality” (formation of beliefs and decision-making based on impartial, evidence-based reasoning rather than personal emotions, biases, or subjective perspectives).

Specifically, what is rational to you may not be rational to others. Regarding how rationality is addressed in REBT literature, I stated in Five, Four, Three... Beliefs:

I sometimes encourage people to consider that “when using GLAD, you’ll make yourself mad or sad.” Per one REBT source, these self-distressing or self-disturbing beliefs are comprised of the following five major characteristics:

1. Rigid or extreme

2. Conducive to psychological disturbance and impaired interpersonal relationships

3. Unhelpful to you as you strive towards your goals

4. False

5. Illogical

I suspect that most (if not all) people use GLAD narratives to some degree. Thus, the mere existence of these automatic beliefs isn’t worth upsetting oneself over. To illustrate each of these unhelpful assumptions, consider the following four distressing or disturbing beliefs:

1. Global evaluation – “Life isn’t worth living if I’m not accepted by other people.”

2. Low frustration tolerance – “I can’t stand not being accepted by other people.”

3. Awfulizing – “It would be awful if I weren’t accepted by other people.”

4. Demandingness – “I must be accepted by other people.”

Given this understanding about the major distressing or disturbing beliefs, it’s worth also noting what qualifies as non-distressing and non-disturbing scripts. For clarity, one REBT source states (page 54):

We have seen that in REBT, beliefs are rational or healthy if they meet three criteria:

1. They are true [being in accordance with the actual state of affairs].

2. They are logical [formally true or valid].

3. They have healthy consequences [a conclusion derived through logic].

When people don’t use rational or healthy beliefs, they’re likely to experience unpleasant though tolerable distress (e.g., disappointment) or unproductive and self-sabotaging disturbance (e.g., enragement). Fortunately, individuals don’t have to remain distressed or disturbed in this way.

For the sake of demonstration, imagine that a mother discusses with her teenage son the decision to begin punishing his undesirable behavior through use of corporal punishment (penalty that involves hitting someone). She thus uses the following modus ponens syllogism:

If Proverbs 13:24 emboldens use of corporal punishment (p), then spanking is an appropriate curse of action for childrearing (q). Proverbs 13:24 emboldens use of corporal punishment (p). Therefore, spanking is an appropriate curse of action for childrearing (q).

The mother’s belief follows logical form. Further, she considers it reasonable, as it’s based in biblical knowledge with which she agrees. Therefore, the mom of the adolescent son deems her perspective as that relating to objective rationality.

However, the teenage son disagrees. Moreover, he helpfully doesn’t utilize GLAD beliefs in opposition to his mother’s perspective. He thus uses the following modus ponens syllogism:

If hitting to discourage harmful behavior is appropriate (p), then striking those who subject me to harmful punishment is also acceptable (q). Hitting to discourage harmful behavior is appropriate (p). Therefore, striking those who subject me to harmful punishment is also acceptable (q).

The son’s belief follows logical form. Also, he considers it reasonable, as predicated on Exodus 21:24 (“eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot”). Thus, the teenage son deems his worldview as that relating to objective rationality. Now, consider that one source states:

A decision maker is characterized by two binary relations. The first reflects decisions that are rational in an “objective” sense: the decision maker can convince others that she is right in making them. The second relation models decisions that are rational in a “subjective” sense: the decision maker cannot be convinced that she is wrong in making them.

Perhaps the mother in my scenario cannot convince her son that corporal punishment is objectively rational, and the son cannot persuade his mom of his position. Given the two-binary distinction in the previous source, both mother and son thereafter claim subjective rationality.

With mother and child valuing biblical instruction, objective rationality doesn’t exist regarding their opposing views – though mom and son agree to disagree, settling on subjective rationality, because neither person can convince the other to adopt a different stance.

Not to complicate matters, suppose that I disagree with the assumptions of both the mother and her teenage son. Specifically, in this hypothetical example, I reject basing logical and reasonable decisions on biblical instruction. Thus, I disagree that either individual uses rationality at all.

This is why I didn’t validate client X’s belief. I’m in no position to assume objective rationality that applies to all people, as such a stance would allude to hubris (exaggerated pride or self-confidence). Likewise, subjective rationality is ostensibly the default setting of belief.

For clarity, the APA defines “belief” as “acceptance of the truth, reality, or validity of something (e.g., a phenomenon, a person’s veracity), particularly in the absence of substantiation.” I believe it’s rational to acknowledge that all living creatures will inescapably die.

Yet, I’ve encountered people who reject this belief. Some individuals with whom I’ve spoken claim that death is merely a transition phase, as life continues on — thus altogether negating the process of death. I couldn’t convince these people to accept my belief, or vice versa.

Therefore, I maintain subjective beliefs which I consider as rational and other people have countervailing subjective beliefs that they regard as rational. Ergo, when it comes to objective rationality, what is rational to you may not be rational to others.

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

Photo credit, Designed by Freepik, fair use

References:

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Belief. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/belief

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Objective. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/objective

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Rationality. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/rationality

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Terror. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/terror

Dryden, W. (2003). Albert Ellis live! SAGE Publications Ltd. Retrieved from https://www.pdfdrive.com/albert-ellis-live-d156836226.html

Dryden, W. (2011). Understanding psychological health: The REBT perspective. Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.pdfdrive.com/understanding-psychological-health-the-rebt-perspective-d185191637.html

Freepik. (n.d.). Friends enjoying the sunset on a rooftop [Image]. Retrieved from https://www.freepik.com/free-ai-image/friends-enjoying-sunset-rooftop_416481173.htm#fromView=search&page=1&position=43&uuid=4f55a662-e880-458d-a6e7-ffccea99a487&query=conversation

Gilboa, I., Maccheroni, F., Marinacci, M., and Schmeidler, D. (2008, October 15). Objective and subjective rationality in a multiple prior model∗. European University Institute. Retrieved from https://www.eui.eu/documents/mwp/conferences/popper/schmeidlerobjectiveandsubjectiverationality.pdf

Hollings, D. (2024, July 9). Absolutistic should beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/absolutistic-should-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, September 13). Acceptance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/acceptance

Hollings, D. (2025, October 19). Adhering to invisible scripts. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/adhering-to-invisible-scripts

Hollings, D. (2025, September 13). Are your actions ruled by reason? Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/are-your-actions-ruled-by-reason

Hollings, D. (2024, November 15). Assumptions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/assumptions

Hollings, D. (2024, November 24). Automatic thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/automatic-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, August 7). Awfulizing. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/awfulizing

Hollings, D. (2025, February 12). Bayesian inference. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/bayesian-inference

Hollings, D. (2026, March 3). Blowback and knock-on effects: Subjectivity of beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/blowback-and-knock-on-effects-subjectivity-of-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2022, May 17). Circle of concern. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/circle-of-concern

Hollings, D. (2024, October 29). Cognitive continuum. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/cognitive-continuum

Hollings, D. (2024, October 27). Correlation does not imply causation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/correlation-does-not-imply-causation

Hollings, D. (2022, October 31). Demandingness. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/demandingness

Hollings, D. (2024, October 21). Desire. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/desire

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2025, April 24). Distress tolerance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/distress-tolerance

Hollings, D. (2025, March 12). Distress vs. disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/distress-vs-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2025, May 16). Eff the logic. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/eff-the-logic

Hollings, D. (2025, December 13). Explanation and justification. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/explanation-and-justification

Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2026, February 13). Five, four, three… beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/five-four-three-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2025, March 5). Five major characteristics of four major irrational beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/five-major-characteristics-of-four-major-irrational-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (2023, September 13). Global evaluations. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/global-evaluations

Hollings, D. (2024, April 13). Goals. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/goals

Hollings, D. (2025, September 7). Have to. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/have-to

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2025, September 22). Hubris. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/hubris

Hollings, D. (2025, December 12). Illogicality and caveats. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/illogicality-and-caveats

Hollings, D. (2025, June 13). It isn’t manly to be enraged. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/it-isn-t-manly-to-be-enraged

Hollings, D. (2025, April 23). Judgment. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/judgment

Hollings, D. (2026, March 11). Just the facts. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/just-the-facts

Hollings, D. (2025, October 13). Knowledge, wisdom, understanding. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/knowledge-wisdom-understanding

Hollings, D. (2025, January 14). Level of functioning and quality of life. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/level-of-functioning-and-quality-of-life

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2022, December 2). Low frustration tolerance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/low-frustration-tolerance

Hollings, D. (2026, March 7). Mind, body, and soul. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/mind-body-soul

Hollings, D. (2024, October 5). Mistaking deductive validity for truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/mistaking-deductive-validity-for-truth

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus ponens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-ponens

Hollings, D. (2023, October 2). Morals and ethics. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/morals-and-ethics

Hollings, D. (2024, September 27). My attitude. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/my-attitude

Hollings, D. (2025, August 2). My philosophy. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/my-philosophy

Hollings, D. (2025, February 24). My pride wouldn’t let me dial. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/my-pride-wouldn-t-let-me-dial

Hollings, D. (2026, March 18). Objective morality and moral absolutism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/objective-morality-and-moral-absolutism

Hollings, D. (2023, April 24). On truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-truth

Hollings, D. (2024, November 18). Opinions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/opinions

Hollings, D. (2025, April 9). Perception, action, and will. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/perception-action-and-will

Hollings, D. (2025, May 3). Predictability of logic. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/predictability-of-logic

Hollings, D. (2026, March 18). Prejudice vs. discernment: Bias. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/prejudice-vs-discernment-bias

Hollings, D. (2024, January 1). Psychoeducation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychoeducation

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2024, April 16). Radioactive rationality. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/radioactive-rationality

Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt

Hollings, D. (2025, August 13). Rational versus irrational thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-versus-irrational-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, December 5). Reasoning. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/reasoning

Hollings, D. (2024, March 14). REBT and emotions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rebt-and-emotions

Hollings, D. (2024, July 18). REBT flexibility. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rebt-flexibility

Hollings, D. (2025, February 24). Reinforcement and punishment. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/reinforcement-and-punishment

Hollings, D. (2024, January 4). Rigid vs. rigorous. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rigid-vs-rigorous

Hollings, D. (2025, December 31). Sanctum: A focus on irrationality. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/sanctum-a-focus-on-irrationality

Hollings, D. (2026, February 25). Self-confidence versus self-esteem: Modest confidence. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-confidence-versus-self-esteem-modest-confidence

Hollings, D. (2022, November 1). Self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2026, January 25). Self-improvement from a Sisyphean perspective. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-improvement-from-a-sisyphean-perspective

Hollings, D. (2022, December 1). Self-sabotage. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-sabotage

Hollings, D. (2023, October 17). Syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/syllogism

Hollings, D. (2022, December 23). The A-C connection. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-a-c-connection

Hollings, D. (2022, December 25). The B-C connection. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-b-c-connection

Hollings, D. (2025, October 22). The construct. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-construct

Hollings, D. (2024, February 6). This ride inevitably ends. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/this-ride-inevitably-ends

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

Hollings, D. (2025, April 18). Tolerable FAD. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/tolerable-fad

Hollings, D. (2025, January 9). Traditional ABC model. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/traditional-abc-model

Hollings, D. (2026, March 21). Tragedy of the commons. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/tragedy-of-the-commons

Hollings, D. (2023, November 23). Validation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/validation

Hollings, D. (2025, September 28). War crimes: A rational course of action. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/war-crimes-a-rational-course-of-action

Hollings, D. (2026, February 12). When are beliefs rational or healthy? Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/when-are-beliefs-rational-or-healthy

Hollings, D. (2023, October 10). When others don’t share your worldview. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/when-others-don-t-share-your-worldview

Hollings, D. (2026, March 22). Worry: Would It Help? Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/worry-would-it-help