George Lakoff attacks "the claims of enlightenment reason" and presents "the realities". At first I though he was attacking rationality, but some translation shows the opposite. Heavy quoting of his blurb, ahead.

"enlightenment reason, which claims that if you just tell people the facts about their interests, they will reason to the right conclusion, since reason is supposed to universal, logical, and based on self-interest" In some sense, what he calls "reason" we call biases.

"Claim: Reason can fit the world directly." - Here we say: "the map is not the territory"

"Claim: Thought is conscious. But neuroscience shows that is about 98 percent unconscious." - We might say the brain uses heuristics.

"Claim: Language is neutral, and can fit the world directly." - Debunking this is a key part of Lakoff's research. He argues that the structure of language shapes our thoughts. I can't immediately think of a directly comparable line of thought on Less Wrong. http://lesswrong.com/lw/od/37_ways_that_words_can_be_wrong/ seems a little different, but maybe someone else can see the connection more easily.