Editing Reason (section)

{{short description|Capacity for consciously making sense of things}}
{{about|the human faculty of reason and rationality}}
{{Epistemology sidebar}}
'''Reason''' is the capacity of [[Consciousness|consciously]] applying [[logic]] by [[Logical consequence|drawing valid conclusions]] from new or existing [[information]], with the aim of seeking the [[truth]].<ref>{{multiref2
|1={{Cite book|last=Proudfoot|first=Michael|title=The Routledge dictionary of philosophy|date=2010|publisher=Routledge|others=A. R. Lacey|isbn=978-0203428467|edition=4th|location=London|pages=341|oclc=503050369|quote=Reason: A general faculty common to all or nearly all humans... this faculty has seemed to be of two sorts, a faculty of intuition by which one 'sees' truths or abstract things ('essences' or universals, etc.), and a faculty of reasoning, i.e. passing from premises to a conclusion (discursive reason). The verb 'reason' is confined to this latter sense, which is now anyway the commonest for the noun too}}
|2={{Cite book|last=Rescher|first=Nicholas|title=The Oxford companion to philosophy|publisher=Oxford University Press|others=Ted Honderich|year=2005|isbn=978-0191532658|edition=2nd|location=Oxford|pages=791|oclc=62563098|quote=reason. The general human 'faculty' or capacity for truth-seeking and problem solving}}
}}</ref> It is associated with such characteristically [[human]] activities as [[philosophy]], [[religion]], [[science]], [[language]], [[mathematics]], and [[art]], and is normally considered to be a distinguishing ability possessed by [[humans]].<ref>{{multiref2
|1={{cite book |last1=Mercier |first1=Hugo |last2=Sperber |first2=Dan |author-link2=Dan Sperber |date=2017 |title=The Enigma of Reason |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=[[Harvard University Press]] |isbn=978-0674368309 |oclc=959650235 |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=zc-WDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA2 2] |quote=Enhanced with reason, cognition can secure better knowledge in all domains and adjust action to novel and ambitious goals, or so the story goes.... Understanding why only a few species have echolocation is easy. Understanding why only humans have reason is much more challenging.}}
|2=Compare: {{cite book |last1=MacIntyre |first1=Alasdair |author-link1=Alasdair MacIntyre |title=Dependent Rational Animals: Why Human Beings Need the Virtues |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Jv9Jx5iQ4uYC |series=The Paul Carus Lectures |volume=20 |publisher=[[Open Court Publishing]] |date=1999 |isbn=978-0812693973 |oclc=40632451 |access-date=2014-12-01 |quote=[T]he exercise of independent practical reasoning is one essential constituent to full human flourishing. It is not—as I have already insisted—that one cannot flourish at all, if unable to reason. Nonetheless not to be able to reason soundly at the level of practice is a grave disability.}}
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Swindal |first1=James |title=Faith: Historical Perspectives |url=https://iep.utm.edu/faith-re/ |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Duquesne University |access-date=December 18, 2023}}</ref> Reason is sometimes referred to as [[rationality]].<ref>{{multiref2
|1={{cite book |editor1-last=Amoretti |editor1-first=Maria Cristina |editor2-last=Vassallo |editor2-first=Nicla |editor2-link=Nicla Vassallo |date=2013 |title=Reason and Rationality |series=Philosophische Analyse / Philosophical Analysis |volume=48 |location=Berlin |publisher=[[De Gruyter]] |isbn=978-3868381634 |oclc=807032616 |doi=10.1515/9783110325867 }}
|2={{cite book |last=Audi |first=Robert |author-link=Robert Audi |date=2001 |title=The Architecture of Reason: The Structure and Substance of Rationality |location=Oxford; New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=0195141121 |oclc=44046914 |doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195158427.001.0001 }}
|3={{cite book |last=Eze |first=Emmanuel Chukwudi |author-link=Emmanuel Chukwudi Eze |date=2008 |title=On Reason: Rationality in a World of Cultural Conflict and Racism |location=Durham, NC |publisher=[[Duke University Press]] |isbn=978-0822341789 |oclc=180989486 |doi=10.1215/9780822388777 }}
|4={{cite book |last=Rescher |first=Nicholas |author-link=Nicholas Rescher |date=1988 |title=Rationality: A Philosophical Inquiry into the Nature and the Rationale of Reason |series=Clarendon Library of Logic and Philosophy |location=Oxford; New York |publisher=[[Clarendon Press]]; [[Oxford University Press]] |isbn=0198244355 |oclc=17954516}}
}}</ref>

'''Reasoning''' involves using more-or-less rational processes of [[Thought|thinking]] and [[cognition]] to extrapolate from one's existing knowledge to generate new knowledge, and involves the use of one's [[intellect]]. The field of <span lang="en" dir="ltr">logic</span> studies the ways in which humans can use '''formal reasoning'''<!--boldface per [[WP:R#PLA]]--> to produce [[Validity (logic)|logically valid]] [[argument]]s and true conclusions.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|last= Hintikka|first=J.|title=Philosophy of logic|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/346240/philosophy-of-logic|encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica|publisher= Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.|access-date=12 November 2013|author-link=Jaako Hintikka}}</ref> Reasoning may be subdivided into [[Logical form|forms]] of [[logical reasoning]], such as [[deductive reasoning]], [[inductive reasoning]], and [[abductive reasoning]].

[[Aristotle]] drew a distinction between logical '''discursive reasoning'''<!--boldface per [[WP:R#PLA]]--> (reason proper), and [[Intuition (psychology)|intuitive reasoning]],<ref name=NE>{{cite book|author=[[Aristotle]]|title=[[Nicomachean Ethics]]}}</ref>{{rp|at=[https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/aristotle/nicomachean-ethics/f-h-peters/text/book-6#chapter-6-1-7 VI.7]}} in which the reasoning process through intuition—however valid—may tend toward the personal and the subjectively opaque. In some social and political settings logical and intuitive modes of reasoning may clash, while in other contexts intuition and formal reason are seen as complementary rather than adversarial. For example, in [[mathematics]], intuition is often necessary for the creative processes involved with arriving at a [[formal proof]], arguably the most difficult of formal reasoning tasks.

Reasoning, like habit or [[intuition]], is one of the ways by which thinking moves from one idea to a related idea. For example, reasoning is the means by which rational individuals understand the significance of sensory information from their environments, or conceptualize abstract dichotomies such as [[Causality|cause and effect]], [[truth]] and [[False (logic)|falsehood]], or [[good and evil]]. Reasoning, as a part of [[Executive functions|executive decision making]], is also closely identified with the ability to self-consciously change, in terms of [[goal]]s, [[belief]]s, [[attitude (psychology)|attitudes]], [[tradition]]s, and [[institution]]s, and therefore with the capacity for [[freedom]] and [[self-determination]].<ref>{{multiref2|1={{cite book|first=Michel|last=Foucault|chapter=What is Enlightenment?|title=The Essential Foucault|editor-first1=Paul|editor-last1=Rabinow|editor-first2=Nikolas|editor-last2=Rose|location=New York|publisher=The New Press|year=2003|pages=43–57}}
|2={{cite journal | last=Kompridis | first=Nikolas | title=So We Need Something Else for Reason to Mean | journal=International Journal of Philosophical Studies | publisher=Informa UK Limited | volume=8 | issue=3 | year=2000 | issn=0967-2559 | doi=10.1080/096725500750039282 | pages=271–295| s2cid=171038942 }}
|3={{cite book|first=Nikolas|last=Kompridis|chapter=The Idea of a New Beginning: A Romantic Source of Normativity and Freedom|title=Philosophical Romanticism|location=New York|publisher=Routledge|year=2006|pages=32–59}}
}}</ref>

[[Psychologist]]s and [[Cognitive science|cognitive scientists]] have attempted to study and explain [[psychology of reasoning|how people reason]], e.g. which cognitive and neural processes are engaged, and how cultural factors affect the inferences that people draw. The field of [[automated reasoning]] studies how reasoning may or may not be modeled computationally. [[comparative psychology|Animal psychology]] considers the question of whether animals other than humans can reason.