To what extent can the psychology of reasoning ‘serve humanity’? Three case studies suggest that the psychology of reasoning has failed to make itself as relevant to the welfare of humanity as its closest fields, judgement and decision-making (JDM) and moral cognition research. This state of affairs is arguably the legacy of the deduction paradigm that long dominated the field, and things might change for the better with the advent of a new paradigm. On the basis of its three pillars (probability, utility, and dual processes), this new paradigm has largely blurred the boundaries between reasoning, JDM, and moral cognition. As a consequence the psychology of reasoning has acquired brand new opportunities to investigate high-stakes domains and risk factors, and to pursue full integration with JDM and moral cognition. These new opportunities will likely bring a rapid increase in the relevance of reasoning research to people’s daily challenges and societies' greater ambitions.