I regard rationality as a tool for solving problems and fulfilling needs. In my view, genuine rationality possesses three essential features:
Honesty with oneself—recognizing one’s own needs.
Awareness of the probability of success for the chosen strategy.
A utilitarian orientation—there must be actual benefit.
If these three points are met, the action can be considered rational.
Explanation of the First Point When a subject faces a problem, they should seek a way to resolve it. I believe one must set aside external voices and listen to the innermost thoughts. Once an idea emerges, the root of the problem should be clarified, and then a strategy chosen according to the circumstances.
Explanation of the Second Point When a problem has a direction for resolution, one should understand the success rates of different strategies under that direction. If one merely guesses at random, without clarity about the outcome or feasibility, this cannot be considered rational.
Explanation of the Third Point The use of rationality should aim at obtaining benefit. Here, “benefit” includes psychological benefit, that is, a sense of gain, though material benefit outweighs psychological benefit. I define psychological benefit as an additional gain obtained through one’s own effort—achieving the desired result and, after subtracting costs, retaining surplus. If psychological benefit is given passively by others, whether it counts depends on whether it was part of one’s plan. If it was intentionally sought, it can be considered rational. This definition of psychological benefit applies only to judging whether an action is rational.
Is schadenfreude rational? It is not rational, because feeling joy at another’s misfortune involves no element of self-acquisition; it is bestowed, not additionally gained. Envy is similar to schadenfreude but more oriented toward planning. It is not rational, because constant fantasizing consumes great energy while yielding little. Moreover, both are regarded by others as malicious acts, which can damage one’s reputation and future life.
Is avoiding pain rational? If the gain equals the cost, it is rational, because inaction would mean loss. If the cost exceeds the benefit, it is irrational. This is often seen in yielding to others’ non-coercive threats. Coercive threats refer to matters involving life, property, and freedom.
Are rational actions under irrational goals themselves irrational? This can be divided into two cases: irrationality due to impossibility, and irrationality due to failing to meet the definition of rationality. Actions under impossible goals cannot achieve the ultimate purpose, and are therefore irrational. Goals that fail to meet the definition of rationality are naturally irrational, even if subordinate actions achieve their expected results.
Long-term and Short-term Goals Long-term goals are necessarily composed of countless smaller goals. If some small goals are irrational but do not prevent the long-term goal from meeting the definition, the overall remains rational. Small goals that fail to meet the definition, as long as they do not affect the long-term goal, still leave the overall rational. Short-term goals can be considered rational as long as they meet the definition of rationality.
Rationality and Its Independence from Other Values I believe rationality is unrelated to good and evil. Rationality becomes associated with goodness only because choosing good encounters less resistance and has a higher chance of success; over time, rationality and goodness become linked. Rationality is also unrelated to success or failure—the key lies in cognition. As long as the three points of rationality are met, even failure can be rational. Furthermore, rationality is not tied to the magnitude of value. Greater benefit does not necessarily mean greater rationality; rather, within the available options, rationality lies in choosing what is most suitable for oneself.
Rationality is not a guarantee of success; its core lies in recognition. Benefit is not the inevitable result of success, but rather the standard by which we judge whether an action is worthwhile. A rational act must carry the intention of pursuing benefit; otherwise, it is nothing more than arbitrariness or emotional impulse.