The Argumentative Theory of Human Reason We did not evolve to reason individually but to reason socially

---

Reasoning is usually treated as a tool for forming sound beliefs and decisions. Yet research on cognitive bias suggests our individual reasoning is often unreliable and shaped by hidden distortions. Social reasoning offers an alternative: we think better together, testing ideas through dialogue and shared critique rather than alone.

---

Reasoning is generally seen as the process of thinking about something to help us come to better beliefs and decisions.

However, there is substantial evidence that our reasoning process, although shaped over tens of thousands of years of evolution, is not particularly good.

Wikipedia, for example, lists well over 100 cognitive biases — ways in which we make sense of things that are not reasonable or accurate, and these biases also have a profound impact on our conversations.

On the other hand, the argumentative theory of reasoning proposes that the primary function of reason is not to improve our knowledge but to exchange arguments with others.

This short, entertaining video explains the basic theory:

he Argumentative Theory of Human Reason | THUNK (source)

And this equally entertaining video goes into more detail and considers some of the implications:

Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber are the creators of the argumentative theory of human reason, set out in their book The Enigma of Reason. In this work, they challenge the conventional assumption that reasoning evolved primarily to help individuals arrive at better beliefs and decisions on their own. Instead, they argue that human reason is fundamentally social in origin and function, shaped by the demands of cooperation and communication.

Its primary role, they suggest, is to produce reasons that justify our views and actions to others and to evaluate the reasons others offer in return. From this perspective, many familiar cognitive biases are not simply defects in thinking but by-products of a system designed for argumentation, persuasion, and collective sense-making.

How and why we reason | Hugo Mercier (source)

---

If our individual reasoning is limited, we can rely less on thinking alone and more on thinking together. We can create spaces where ideas are examined, questioned, and improved in dialogue. By practising social reasoning in small groups, we strengthen our judgement and make more considered decisions.

---