Ken Hammond has spent over a half-century analysing judgment and decision-making. His long-time focus has been on the dichotomy between judgment theories of correspondence (working to achieve empirical accuracy) and coherence (aiming for rationality and consistency) and the political consequences that can come from not understanding which of these theories people are following. In Beyond Rationality Hammond sums up his work and illustrates it with penetrating case studies on topics such as why Kennedy and Khruschev misunderstood each other, Colin Powell's misjudgments, the modes of thought on the Supreme Court, and much, much more. Hammond has changed the way academics think about decision making; with this book, he aims to show a larger audience why mistaken judgments happen, how to make better decisions, and how to understand the thought modes operating in the political process.