In fact it may be irrational of me to pass up the opportunity to make myself whole again by invoking the law when it is to my advantage.
Rationality isn’t a moral or legal excuse.
~Max
You could say my view of rationality is amoral, transactional, solipsistic, perhaps even sociopathic - but not my worldview.
~Max
“I can refuse to follow the rules of society because the benefits of doing so outweigh the risks of ill consequences” is amoral, unethical, and highly logical - highly rational.
An example of this kind of behavior is the young, healthy, possibly-vaccinated-probably-unvaccinated UPS person who routinely barges into rooms full of geriatric patients with immunodeficiency disorders.
Without a mask.
~Max
It is not rational to spread disease around your community, resulting in overwhelming the hospitals, which he may depend upon to save his life if he has a heart attack or accident. It’s not rational to damage the society that sustains you. Ignorance is not rational.
These are not guaranteed consequences. You would have to say, it is not rational to increase the risk of spreading disease around your community.
And you would still be wrong. The rationality of a choice depends on the options and knowledge at hand. It is impossible to say, ipso facto, this choice is irrational in all situations - possibly with one exception, the guaranteed destruction of self. Even this may be rational in some circumstances.
It can be, if damaging that society sustains you better. Specifically, if it advances your self-interest more than the alternative.
Nor is it necessarily irrational.
~Max
You are describing anarchy, not a functioning society. You are describing the actions of amoral lawbreakers who only succeed by not being caught and subsequently removed from society. I’m done playing sophistry games here.
I describe a rational person who refuses to get vaccinated, when the golden rule of moral society would that he did, but those in positions of personal trust tempt otherwise and reinforce ignorance, and the law stands indifferent.
~Max
Well, that kind of renders the issue of rationality moot. If you don’t have reliable information about facts, abstract “rationality” becomes pretty much irrelevant to the question of whether you’re making wise decisions.
We could ask, of course, to what extent a rational person has a responsibility to maintain sources and standards of reliable information that extend beyond a few people “in positions of personal trust”.
Just a reminder that the argument “Better that a thousand strangers be placed at risk of death than I be minorly inconvenienced” is not an “amoral” position; it is a morally bankrupt one.
Pretty much the GOP in a nutshellcase.
Just as morally bankrupt as “one who brandishes a gun cannot for a moment feel that he is in danger, and if he does he may kill without fear of punishment”.
Warned y’all 90-odd posts ago. 
Thanks, I should have listened to you. It’s come down to - It’s rational to make decisions on dangerously wrong/crazy information, even when correct information is readily available. You can be a criminal and flout societies laws, endangering others as long as you figure you won’t be caught.
I think I felt that way once for about two weeks after reading Atlas Shrugged at age 19. I recovered quickly, though.
Obligatory quote:
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."
Relevant Doonesbury:
And then there’s the latest crackpot Republican theory about the Omicron variant:
“Here comes the MEV - the Midterm Election Variant,” tweeted Jackson, who, not for nothing, is also a physician. “They NEED a reason to push unsolicited nationwide mail-in ballots. Democrats will do anything to CHEAT during an election - but we’re not going to let them!”
And then there was this from Fox News personality Pete Hegseth: “Count on a variant about every October, every two years.”
So… Biden is so powerful… that he’s able to get countries from around the world, and scientists and doctors as well… to go along with a “fake” variant. He was able to convince the entire country of South Africa that a variant exists. And then make all of the countries in Europe and Asia play along.
Just so he can “push” mail in ballots so that (something something) this will help his party win.
This is simply moronic and a three year old could see that it’s moronic. It will probably convince many Republicans.
Yes, and rather than have a President powerful enough to turn the world around his finger, they prefer the impotent dunce that allowed the election to be stolen right out from under his nose.
Biden is Schrodinger’s president.
You don’t know whether he’s an evil genius who controls the world, or a senile old coot until you open the box.