GPH-International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research

Common Sense and Rationality

Mohan Debbarma, Dr. — 2026-09-30

Common sense and rationality are two of the fundamental notions in philosophy that define human thinking, reasoning, and behavior. In general, common sense denotes the practical knowledge and beliefs possessed by ordinary people, while rationality implies logical thinking and justified reasoning. Philosophers of all times – from Aristotle to Thomas Reid, fromDescartes to Hume, from Kant to Moore and Ludwig Wittgenstein – have explored the relations between common sense and rationalityin their own ways. This investigation discusses the question about how common sense and rationality are associated in philosophy. The study also argues that common sense is the base of human knowledge and thinking, which is corrected by the notion of rationality. Moreover, this work will explore the importance of common sense for ethics, science, education, politics, and modern technology-based society. For many years, common sense has been a prominent element of philosophical research, representing the basis of human reasoning, but being criticized by sceptics and rationalists. From Aristotle and Thomas Reid up to the contemporary discussions about artificial intelligence, common sense continues to be an important notion in terms of understanding human knowledge, ethics, politics, science, and education.Six related issues to be explored in this essay include common sense and skepticism; ethics and political rationality; common sense in science, education, and political philosophy; artificial intelligence and common sense reasoning; and modern philosophical discussions on common sense and rationality. Philosophical analysis in this study shows that common sense cannot be taken as an infallible source of knowledge, nor can it be viewed as merely a prejudice. Instead, it is a type of rationality used by humans in practice.

ENTREPRENEURIAL ORIENTATION, INNOVATION CAPABILITY AND SUSTAINABLE SME GROWTH IN BAYELSA STATE

IBEMA RICHARD TURNER — 2026-10-06

The study examined entrepreneurial orientation, innovation capability and sustainable SME growth in Bayelsa State. Specifically, it examined the influence of innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking on sustainable SME growth and assessed the mediating role of innovation capability in these relationships. The study adopted a quantitative research approach and used data obtained from 45 respondents from selected SMEs in Bayelsa State. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Pearson Product Moment Correlation, multiple linear regression and mediation analysis. The findings revealed relatively high levels of innovativeness (M = 3.92), proactiveness (M = 3.86), risk-taking (M = 3.74), innovation capability (M = 3.89) and sustainable SME growth (M = 3.91). The correlation results showed positive relationships among the study variables, with innovation capability recording a strong positive relationship with sustainable SME growth (r = 0.704). The regression results indicated that innovativeness (β = 0.267, p = 0.005), proactiveness (β = 0.211, p = 0.023), risk-taking (β = 0.181, p = 0.029) and innovation capability (β = 0.409, p < 0.001) each made significant positive contributions to sustainable SME growth. The model explained 61.0% of the variance in sustainable SME growth. Furthermore, mediation analysis revealed that innovation capability significantly mediated the relationships between innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking and sustainable SME growth, with indirect effects of 0.164, 0.139 and 0.113, respectively. The study concludes that entrepreneurial orientation contributes to sustainable SME growth both directly and through the development of innovation capability. It therefore recommends that SMEs in Bayelsa State strengthen innovative practices, proactive market behaviour, calculated risk-taking and organisational capabilities for developing and implementing innovations to improve sustainable growth and competitiveness.

Boundary Dispute and the Health, Religious, and Political Life of Communities in South-East Nigeria

Ndu, Queen Ngozi — 2026-10-09

Background: Boundary dispute constitutes a persistent constraint on the institutional dimensions of community life in the South-East geo-political zone of Nigeria, in so far as contested claims over land ownership disrupt access to healthcare, undermine religious practice, and destabilise political authority within affected communities. This study investigated the effect of boundary dispute on the health, religious, and political life of selected communities in the South-East region.

Objective: To establish the extent to which boundary dispute affects the health of the people in the affected communities in the south east geo-political zone of Nigeria, to determine the effects of boundary dispute on religious life, and to identify the effects of boundary dispute on political life of the affected communities.

Methods: The study adopted a descriptive and correlational design involving 400 respondents drawn, through purposive and simple random sampling, from a population of 1,059,431 persons across the affected communities. Data were collected using a structured and validated four-point Likert-scale questionnaire whose health, religious life, and political life subscales returned Cronbach’s alpha reliability indices of 0.87, 0.91, and 0.85 respectively. Analysis was conducted using frequencies, percentages, means, standard deviations, and simple linear regression, tested at the 0.05 level of significance.

Results: Findings revealed that 55% of respondents reported that boundary dispute had a strong negative effect on health, 66% reported a strong negative effect on religious life, and 52% reported a strong negative effect on political life. Regression analysis confirmed that boundary dispute exerted a statistically significant negative effect on health (B = .580, β = .544, t = 11.952, p < .001), religious life (B = .389, β = .494, t = 9.372, p < .001), and political life (B = .199, β = .494, t = 6.046, p < .001), such that all three null hypotheses were rejected.

Conclusion: The study concludes that unresolved boundary dispute structurally threatens affected South-East communities by compromising healthcare access, religious practice, and political authority, implying that institutional restoration requires integrated attention to all three domains simultaneously and sustainably.