People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers.
Decision making is a complex process which needs to take into account not just logical soundness of arguments, but the emotional impact of decisions as well. Making decisions may not be a binary problem in all situations. It requires thoughtful input from various angles to the problem. For example, making a business purchase decision like deciding the best option among different vendors may be guided by purely logical arguments, however, making a decision on selling ancestral property may need to take conflicting emotional interests into consideration.
As much as we depend on our emotions and gut feelings to help us guide towards our decisions, justifying such reasons with logic invalidates our concept of logical soundness of arguments. Logic and emotions are two separate classes of reasoning. Logical arguments can be derived using universally established principles, corroborated by theories from experts, and almost always have a definite outcome. Emotional arguments, on the other hand vary for each individual under different contexts. The outcome of decisions made on the basis of emotional factors does not guarantee certainty of success.
It is thus important to understand which aspects are dominantly guiding our decisions. If emotions are predominant, we should also understand the risk of leaving logical arguments aside and embrace the uncertainty of outcomes. Covering up the disadvantages of emotional decision making with logical arguments afterwards only aims to hamper our understanding of the problem and its results, and diminishes our ability to think reasonably in the long run.
Once someone makes a decision based on their emotions, they should understand its complete consequences, which can no longer be predicted by reasoning. If they, however, try to justify the decisions they made with logic, not only are they not trying to understand or take responsibility of the risks of their decisions, they are also being untruthful to themselves.
Based on the context, such kinds of actions may be unethical, outright lying, or manipulative. Logic is direct, emotions are not. When we make a logical argument, we have facts, proven theories, expert opinions on our side. When we make an emotional argument, we can at best appeal to the human nature, for instance, by evoking empathy. If we are making a decision on whether to hire or fire someone from our company, our actions need to be supported by cogent reasoning. If we take our emotions into considerations, and cover it up or justify it wrongly with logical statements, we are treading into unethical territories. It reflects on how well we can manage our emotions, how much influence these emotions hold on our actions and this shapes our decision-making skills. The less we try to acknowledge the emotional aspects in our decision making, the more we tend to become fallacious decision makers.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-28 | AC1990 | 58 | view |
| 2020-01-19 | lcosenza | 54 | view |
| 2019-12-29 | mrigimunjal | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-25 | likhithae | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-22 | yashincontrol | 50 | view |
- Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive. Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated. 50
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 54
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 83
- Productivity and Rewards 63
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, thus, well, for example, for instance, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 65.0 58.6224719101 111% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2433.0 2235.4752809 109% => OK
No of words: 458.0 442.535393258 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31222707424 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99752715536 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 215.323595506 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.508733624454 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 780.3 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.4665731081 60.3974514979 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.590909091 118.986275619 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8181818182 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.04545454545 5.21951772744 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.353214840938 0.243740707755 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117426527084 0.0831039109588 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0802039638517 0.0758088955206 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.215253925717 0.150359130593 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0499115589277 0.0667264976115 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.1392134831 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.1639044944 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.21 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 100.480337079 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.