In the West, Darwin and Freud, each in his own way, undermined faith in rationality as a given. Since the addition of rational techniques to one's possibilities of thinking amounts to a decision to supplement existing capabilities, whatever they might be, with new ones, the real question concerning inclusion of techniques of practical philosophy in negotiations is whether it is better to have the widest range of conceptual tools available in a difficult situation or not . The choice does not seem especially difficult. The reliability of the simpler logical forms has long been known, and while alternative logical systems have been discussed by philosophers over the past century, there has been very little contention about the validity of inferences within conventional assumptions of two-valued logic. These concerns are not just new things to talk about, but redefinitions of the parameters of rationality.
Philosophical counseling makes use of both critical and constructive techniques.
In cross-cultural negotiations, acknowledgment of cultural difference must be seen as a technique, not a sentiment. Before the negotiation of provisions of an agreement begins, there are unique opportunities to stipulate resolutions of conflicting understandings and discover elements of language that may become especially important as the negotiations proceed. The constructive moment goes beyond analysis and evaluation to propose new principles of thinking and being, thereby opening up new possibilities of imagining relationships among things. Constructive thinking may draw on such diverse sources as ethical theory, metaphysical speculation, or sacred texts. Being able to explore avenues of constructive thinking is especially important in cross-cultural negotiations because images of self and other, which are always important, are much more in flux in these situations.