Modern societies rely on formal models of rational choice to guide decisions in economics, governance, public health, and technology. Chief among these is game theory, a framework widely regarded as analytically rigorous and value-neutral. Yet across domains — from pandemic preparedness to climate governance — decisions deemed “rational” within these models have produced outcomes that undermine the conditions required for human and planetary life to continue and flourish.

This white paper argues that the problem lies not in misapplication or moral failure, but in the axioms of rationality embedded in dominant decision models themselves. By auditing the hidden assumptions of game theory, the paper shows that it is structurally blind to life necessities, commons, prevention, and long-term viability. As a result, it cannot detect the conditions of its own failure.

Drawing on John McMurtry’s Life-Value Onto-Axiology, the paper proposes a constructive upgrade: redefining rationality in terms of life-range expansion — the preservation and growth of the coherent capacities for thought, felt being, and action across time. It replaces equilibrium with viability as the primary success criterion and introduces universal life necessities as non-negotiable constraints on rational choice.

Situated explicitly across the COVID-19 pandemic, the climate crisis, and the rise of AI-mediated decision systems, the paper offers a minimum coherence standard for rationality in a finite, living world. Its central claim is practical and urgent: rational systems that cannot see life cannot sustain it — and therefore cannot sustain themselves.

Read More