John Searle's book "Mind" has an important influence on the idea of ​​rational action and provides suggestions regarding the question of free will. The book also symbolizes a change in John's imagination since he published the book, The Rediscovery of the Mind, in 1992. It illustrates how consciousness causes certain thoughts in ways that are inexplicable given the reactions of neurons . present in humans (Searle, 1992). In his book he suggests the possibility of a non-human concept and how the system can cause humans to act in a certain way or cause certain things to happen (Searle, 2004). The main focus of the book is on what Searle terms the conventional model from the human perspective and the rationality of human ways of constructing alternative models. Say no to plagiarism. Get Custom Essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get Original EssaySerle, the focus of the classical model is related to the idea that various actions of humans are caused by desires and the beliefs of different people. Searle suggests that the ultimate aspirations or desires of humans are not exposed to rational limitations and that the fact is that desires are subject to rationality in concrete reasoning that a matter leads to the satisfaction of human desire. The other segments of the classical model are: first, rationality is influenced by the following rules, second, desires must be consistent and third, will can only emerge where the psychological occurrences of actions are not correct (Searle, 2004 ). In the book on seals he discusses these classical models in the first chapter contrasting them in a usual blunt and crude manner. Searle introduces how the major concern of the book is illustrating how assumptions and variances in decision making are a matter of decisional presuppositions subject to different reasons (Searle, 1992). He illustrates his views on the issue of decision making and how alternative theories are crucial in justifying theories regarding decision making and the ideologies behind the issue. The basic arrangement of intentions, actions and ideas is discussed in chapter two of the book which lays some foundation for this originality. The chapter actually highlights that the gaps in various efforts regarding satisfactions and acceptance orientation revolve around three major gaps. The first atonement concerns the prior intentions to act and the reasons underlying the actions, the second the prior motivations to act and the intentions of the actions and the third the motivation behind the intentions to act and the means to lead to the planned action until the end (Searle, 2004). Chapter three of Searle's book is a continuation of chapter two dealing with the stipulated gaps. The chapter illustrates that the intelligence behind what happens in the interstices encompasses a complex non-human impression of self-being. This impression requires awareness, frequent persistence over time, operating under certain constraints of discretion, a human idea of ​​deciding to begin and implement certain actions under the presumption of free will as well as taking responsibility for certain actions already taken (Searle, 2004). According to Searle, there is no justification for the actions taken by various people in different circumstances and the gaps explained do not provide a basis for determining the actions nor do they provide sufficient clarification. Chapter four of Searle's book illustrates the structuresrational reasons. He argues that, among other things, they have propositional arrangements and must be related to the reasons on which they are justified. Finally, if they must notably operate in an intermediate deliberation and justify the action, they must participate in the entire justification process. However, for reflection to be rational, the line spacing must not differ with reasons emanating from external agents but rather believe and recognize the essential reasons. The chapter continues to explain that actions must involve at least a few elements that act as motivators for action and that motivation can be internal, such as desires or external such as the desire, need or obligations to carry out to the action (Searle, 1992). Therefore, rationality in decision-making involves recognizing key motivational factors and evaluating their comparative weights, appreciating and judging important non-motivational details, and justifying these motives to explain certain reasons to act.Chapters five and six of Searle's book illustrate the reasons for certain actions. The author develops the argument that there are reasons that the majority do not want. Some motivators do not determine or fulfill obligations. He argues that the use of language involves a commitment to its broad applications and that it is applicable to oneself and others. For example, when it comes to a personal desire to gain or achieve something, the need should extend to what others want or desire in a similar situation (Szasz, 2002). Accordingly, if my desires are determined by the efforts of others to realize them, then it is obvious that everyone must be motivated to help others realize their needs and Searle in this chapter supports this fact. Searle goes on to mention that desires are personal and that everyone develops them and commits to realizing them, thus justifying that actions are motivated by the person since desires do not emanate from external sources but from deep within humans (Searle , 2004). Chapter seven of the book explains Searle's position regarding different models. For example, he points out that the classical model does not take into account a person's will and how weakness of will affects their action. Chapter eight illustrates a clear message that there is no reasonable logic for true reasoning. In his book he reveals his position by the contrast he makes between the rational relation between properties and the relation between rational restrictions on belief. In chapter 9 of Searle's book, he illustrates his views on the issue of free will. He suggests that the reality of life deviations and certain actions leads to psychological problems. He explains that the totality of psychological concerns is not enough to determine the outcome. He argues that the real-life discrepancy in free will is not related to neurobiological facts. In fact, the question of the relationship between neurobiological facts and how this Couse effectiveness in humans remains unanswered since the whole problem is complex (Szasz, 2002). In a word, Searle's book is direct and characteristically clear given his arguments regarding specific issues such as free will and the cause of actions which are major themes that run through the entire book. His argument is compelling and justifiable in the way he explains his point of view on the matter. However, his arguments may not be in harmony with different points of view, as there must be varied opinions and reasons on the matter. The fact.