Are our actions and decisions rational?

A rational action is justifiable and as such it is defensible. How many people can defend their actions or decisions when asked to do so? Most people will simply say they took the action or made the decision because the law, custom or tradition allowed it. To be rational is to be moral. Some people will defend their actions even at the peril of their freedom when they consider the action to be rational.

Many people look at only one side of a situation and act or take decisions even when the action is based on insufficient facts or information. Imagine the confusion in the country if the electoral commissioner just sits in her office and deletes names from the electoral register just because she was following the law. Such a course of action cannot be reasonable. In the final analysis any such action can be detrimental to the individual himself or herself and injurious to society as a whole.

Morality is not majority preference. Morally each individual is responsible for his or her own actions. To be rational and therefore moral involves showing an awareness of the consequences of your actions, and to be able to determine whether that action is detrimental or beneficial both to the individual and society. A person who is being rational relates his or her action to the consequences of that action in order to determine its reasonableness, whether it is detrimental or beneficial.

As an example, consider a person who wants to relocate to another country to seek greener pastures; Meanwhile he will be leaving behind a family totally dependent on him and an ailing mother. What should that person do to avoid difficulties for himself and dependants? This scenario describes a moral situation for which a moral judgement has to be made. 

Another scenario is that a nurse or teacher trainee in her final year is pregnant and about to write her final examination. Should she register for the final examination or have the examination deferred? The elements of the situation which must be considered are the student herself, the baby she is expecting and the hospital or school she will be posted to after the final examination. Whether she is married or not is not relevant. What is the rational thing to do?

 All these elements must be carefully considered to achieve balance. Deciding just because it is convenient at that particular time might not be the best thing to have done in the final analysis. There is the pregnant trainee’s physical, emotional and mental well-being to consider. There is the baby’s well-being before, during and after birth to also consider and finally there is also the interest of the institution to which the pregnant trainee will be posted to consider.

There is a recent case of the authorities of the Nursery and Midwifery Training School at Mampong, Ashanti, not allowing three pregnant final year trainees to write their licentiate examination. The passing of this examination will qualify them to be posted to hospitals for their one year National Service. 

Some people, including lawyers and even CHRAJ, have commented on this issue. Some are claiming that not allowing them to register for the licentiate examination constitutes discrimination and is also unconstitutional.  What kind of service can these pregnant women offer to the hospitals they will be posted to for National Service? Will they be asked to go on maternity leave or their National Service can be deferred in this case? Will that also not be discrimination? The other course of action is for them to obey their school regulation and write the licentiate examination the following year and be able to do their National Service effectively. Which action will be beneficial both to the individual nurses as well as the society?

Another thing which to me is not rational is why teacher associations are up in arms because the powers that be have proposed that new teachers are now going to be supervised in their first year in the teaching field. This is standard practice in jurisdictions which understand teacher or professional development. Indeed, already practising teachers need constant in-service education or they become stale. The whole situation must be well assessed to come up with a decision which is beneficial to the teachers, as well as the pupils or students they teach.

In 1996, I administered a questionnaire to a number of heads of basic schools on school-based supervision. One of the questions I asked was whether it would be necessary for trained teachers to undergo in-service education. One head answered that it was not because the teachers were already professionals. Are teacher associations agreeing with this position?  Would that be the best for everyone? Teachers need assistance to become skilled professionals.

Writer’s e-mail: jabboaoffei@yahoo.co.uk