By the nature of cognition beyond the perceptual level, the exercise of reason is non-automatic, thus involving self-driven effort. A context in which facts are to be studied is often complex, i.e. it involves many parts of reality which must be dealt with selective focus and rigorous integration by a finite consciousness; the integration here is both hierarchical (i.e. relationships between the concrete and the abstract) and contextual (i.e. relationships between different facts drawn from different parts of reality). Hence, we see that the exercise of reason, i.e. rationality, is not necessarily easy; indeed, it is often complex and always needs rigour, i.e. focus and logic. Hence, we must ask: why bother with rationality in every waking moment? Why not be irrational once in a while, just to “relax and enjoy life”?
Here, we see a false and — in my view — dangerous dichotomy: consistent rationality that is a constant struggle vs. inconsistent rationality that leaves room for relaxation and the enjoyment of life. In the coming sections, I shall show the following: (1) Consistent rationality is essentially a consistent value for one’s own life in every sense, from the enjoyment of the moment to long-range success. (2) Consistent rationality is not and should not be a constant struggle; indeed, I want to show that a constant struggle in the pursuit of reason is precisely what is irrational. (3) The aforementioned dichotomy is harmful to one’s life and one’s pursuit of happiness. I shall also present my understanding of how to practise rationality in various contexts, from the everyday to the long-range.