The Rational Study of the Nonrational

Instead of dismissing this as coincidence or myth, Narby questions the limits of the Western scientific gaze itself. Not science. The gaze.

In that context, he writes:

“The difficulty of grasping ‘shamanism’ lies not so much in the concept itself as in the gaze of those who use it. The academic analysis of shamanism will always be the rational study of the nonrational, in other words, a self-contradictory proposition or a cul-de-sac.”

That sentence is sharp. Because it exposes the boundaries of science.

Western rationality is extraordinarily powerful. It has built medicine, technology, organizational science, and the entire corporate ecosystem most of us operate in. But it is also structured around a core assumption:

Reality is best understood through analytical decomposition, measurement, and verification.

But…

• What happens when a form of knowledge does not emerge from analysis but from experience?
• When insight is accessed through altered states, embodied perception, intuition, or relational attunement?

The immediate academic reflex is to translate it. To dissect it. To categorize it. And in that very act, we lose what we are trying to understand.

From a rational point of view, skepticism toward anything “nonrational” is healthy. It protects us. We need discipline, evidence and clear thinking.

But we need another perspective as well … as science itself shows us something important: the body reacts before the mind explains. We feel before we formulate. Intuition often connects complexity faster than logic does. Emotional stability comes before clear strategy.

So what we call “nonrational” is not necessarily irrational. It may simply function in a different way than analysis.

This matters in all aspects of our lives. One of the key application in business setting is coaching.

We can clearly define the “coach position.” We can list competencies. We can build certification systems. But when a coach truly works at mastery level, something shifts in the room that is not just technique. The client relaxes differently. Insight lands deeper. Energy changes.

The same is true for breathwork, somatic work, essential oils, silence, embodied presence. We can research them. We can explain parts of them.

But explanation is not the same as experience.

When Cognitive Approaches Reach Their Limit

Corporate development has focused mainly on the cognitive side for decades. Another model. Another framework. Another tool. Another study. At the beginning, this brought huge growth. Now, the returns are smaller.

The glass is already full. Yet we keep adding more.

Not because science is wrong. But because it is the only language we fully trust.