When people encounter ideas or actions that contradict their own beliefs, their immediate response is often dismissal or criticism. It is easy—and common—to label such opposing views as irrational, absurd, or foolish without genuinely attempting to understand the reasoning behind them.
However, a more effective approach is to assume that your opponent, regardless of how misguided their stance might appear, is acting rationally. Rationality doesn't imply correctness or morality; rather, it suggests a coherent logic underlying decisions and actions. Recognizing this logic provides a vital framework for meaningful analysis.
If you dismiss an opponent as irrational, you essentially abandon any structured method to understand, engage with, or even effectively counter their position. You lose the ability to anticipate their actions, respond strategically, or uncover areas of common ground or genuine disagreement.
Assuming rationality forces you to consider the incentives, experiences, and context shaping another person's choices. It encourages a deeper exploration of the thought processes guiding decisions and, crucially, positions you to respond intelligently and effectively. Without this assumption, debates quickly become shallow.