IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/grdene/v15y2006i1d10.1007_s10726-005-1918-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spiritual Rationality: Integrating Faith-Based and Secular-Based Problem Solving and Negotiation as Systems Design for Right Action

Author

Listed:
  • Melvin F. Shakun

    (New York University)

Abstract

Faith-based (spiritual) and secular-based (rational) approaches to problem solving and negotiation are commonly viewed as strongly conflicting approaches. While analysis is used in faith-based problem solving, problem solutions can come directly from God (One, all there is) in which case advocates say that analysis is not really necessary. Problem solutions can also come from religious laws and practices providing values that serve as intermediates/surrogates (Section 11) for connectedness with God. These religious laws and practices are based on analysis and interpretation – much of it quite rational – of God's word/scriptures, the latter providing religious axioms. Axioms for secular-based problem solving follow scientific method. Faith and secular belief systems differ, but share some values. For advocates of secular-based problem solving, faith-based solutions (actions) that differ from the results of their own rational analyses are hard to accept. Rationality and spirituality represent different brain capabilities. Extending rationality to spiritual rationality can integrate these capabilities. With spiritual-rationality problem solving, an individual – whether his orientation is primarily faith-based or secular-based – validates a problem solution both rationally and spiritually for right action (decision) using a spiritual rationality validation test. If the solution is not valid, the individual continues problem solving trying to validate spiritual rationality of a solution. With spiritual rationality both a faith-based advocate and a secular-based advocate can each achieve internal consistency of rationality and spirituality. Conflict between them could still exist. However, their common adoption of spiritual rationality and the Evolutionary Systems Design (ESD) framework – providing a common methodology that highlights high-level purpose shared by individuals – can facilitate problem evolution leading to group agreed-upon solution (right action). The core axiom of ESD/spiritual-rationality problem solving is that individuals (agents) have a shared inherent purpose to experience connectedness with One. In integrating spirituality and rationality, spiritual rationality – by validating right action in problem solving and negotiation – can help maintain connectedness with One as shared inherent purpose in an individual's life.

Suggested Citation

  • Melvin F. Shakun, 2006. "Spiritual Rationality: Integrating Faith-Based and Secular-Based Problem Solving and Negotiation as Systems Design for Right Action," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:15:y:2006:i:1:d:10.1007_s10726-005-1918-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10726-005-1918-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10726-005-1918-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10726-005-1918-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Melvin F. Shakun, 1999. "Consciousness, Spirituality and Right Decision/Negotiation in Purposeful Complex Adaptive Systems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, January.
    2. Melvin F. Shakun, 1999. "An ESD Computer Culture for Intercultural Problem Solving and Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 237-249, May.
    3. Melvin F. Shakun, 2003. "Right Problem Solving: Doing the Right Thing Right," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(6), pages 463-476, November.
    4. Bui, Tung X. & Jelassi, Tawfik M. & Shakun, Melvin F., 1990. "Group Decision and Negotiation Support Systems (GDNSS)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 141-142, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Melvin F. Shakun, 2006. "ESD: A Formal Consciousness Model for International Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(5), pages 491-510, September.
    2. Jim Sheffield, 2004. "The Design of GSS-Enabled Interventions: A Habermasian Perspective," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(5), pages 415-435, September.
    3. Melvin F. Shakun, 2001. "Unbounded Rationality," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 97-118, March.
    4. Melvin F. Shakun, 2003. "Right Problem Solving: Doing the Right Thing Right," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 12(6), pages 463-476, November.
    5. Melvin F. Shakun, 2009. "Connectedness Problem Solving and Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 89-117, March.
    6. Melvin F. Shakun, 2013. "The Connectedness Decision Paradigm: Group Decision, Negotiation and Leadership in World Problems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 599-615, July.
    7. Melvin F. Shakun, 2005. "Multi-bilateral Multi-issue E-negotiation in E-commerce with a Tit-for-Tat Computer Agent," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 383-392, September.
    8. Dan Palmon & Ephraim F. Sudit, 2009. "Commercial Insurance of Financial Disclosure: Auditors’ Independence, and Investors’ Protection," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 27-40, January.
    9. Melvin F. Shakun, 1999. "An ESD Computer Culture for Intercultural Problem Solving and Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 237-249, May.
    10. Daniel Druckman & Bennett Ramberg & Richard Harris, 2002. "Computer-Assisted International Negotiation: A Tool for Research and Practice," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 231-256, May.
    11. Guy Olivier Faure & Melvin F. Shakun, 1999. "Introduction to the Special Issue on Intercultural Negotiation," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 183-185, May.
    12. Clyde Holsapple & Hsiangchu Lai & Andrew Whinston, 1997. "Implications of Negotiation Theory for Research and Development of Negotiation Support Systems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 255-274, May.
    13. Rudolf Vetschera, 2005. "Strategic Manipulation of Preference Information in Multi-Criteria Group Decision Methods," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 393-414, September.
    14. Melvin F. Shakun, 1999. "Consciousness, Spirituality and Right Decision/Negotiation in Purposeful Complex Adaptive Systems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, January.
    15. Andrej Škraba & Miroljub Kljajić & Mirjana Kljajić Borštnar, 2007. "The Role of Information Feedback in the Management Group Decision-Making Process Applying System Dynamics Models," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 77-95, January.
    16. Joel Harmon, 1998. "Electronic Meetings and Intense Group Conflict: Effects of a Policy-Modeling Performance Support System and an Audio Communication Support System on Satisfaction and Agreement," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 131-153, March.
    17. Espinasse, Bernard & Picolet, Guy & Chouraqui, Eugene, 1997. "Negotiation support systems: A multi-criteria and multi-agent approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 389-409, December.
    18. Daniel Druckman & James N. Druckman & Tatsushi Arai, 2004. "e-Mediation: Evaluating the Impacts of an Electronic Mediator on Negotiating Behavior," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 13(6), pages 481-511, November.
    19. Shiwei He & Rui Song & Sohail S. Chaudhry, 2014. "Service-oriented intelligent group decision support system: Application in transportation management," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 939-951, November.
    20. Mareike Schoop & Frank Köhne & Katja Ostertag, 2010. "Communication Quality in Business Negotiations," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 193-209, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:grdene:v:15:y:2006:i:1:d:10.1007_s10726-005-1918-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.