Practical rationality “is defined as any way of life that sees and judges worldly activity in relation to the purely pragmatic and selfish interests of the individual and the people who they practice practical rationality, accept certain realities and simply calculate the most convenient ways to deal with the difficulties they present” (Ritzer & Siepnisky, 2011, p. 136). The next form is theoretical rationality, which involves a mental effort to master reality through abstract concepts rather than action, “involves abstract cognitive processes such as logical deduction, induction, causal attribution, and living” (Ritzer & Siepnisky, 2011, page 136). The third type of rationality is substantial; this type states that actions are ordered into patterns across sets of values ​​in a society. “Substantial rationality involves a choice of means to achieve ends in the context of a value system” (Ritzer & Siepnisky, 2011, p. 136). Finally, formal rationality involves calculation, “but whereas in practical rationality this calculation occurs with reference to pragmatic self-interests, in formal rationality it occurs with reference to “universally applied rules, laws, and regulations” (Ritzer & Siepnisky, 2011, p. 136 ). Therefore, based on these definitions, it is clear how each rationality is similar and different based on its locations within it