One can be rational "based on or in accordance with reason or
logic." and also have justification ""the action of showing
something to be right or reasonable." for murder. Sane
"sensible, practical, advisable, responsible, realistic,
prudent, wise, reasonable, rational, levelheaded,
commonsensical, judicious, politic" shares the word rational.
However, it's meaning is akin to a "reasonable person" and _not_
necessarily Logic. One can use Logic and Reason to Justify
Murder. They will consider themselves Sane, because Logic is
Rational. But in that case, they will not fit the definition of
a "Reasonable Man", which defines Rational differently than
Logic. Pure Logic does not imply Sanity. Nor does it imply
Insanity. it is unrelated. Care must be taken in defining the
term Rational properly. It means something quite different in
different contexts. Many a logical murderer has become confused
at being referred to as Insane when they were being perfectly
logical. They, in fact, were insane: "in a state of mind that
prevents normal perception, behavior, or social interaction" -
because they lacked what is considered "normal perception,
behavior", etc. Social norms apply. A rational insane person can
exist, should the rational person be rational by virtue of Logic
rather than by what is considered "A reasonable man". However,
all that being said: "What is a reasonable person?" really?
That's where things get even trickier. Personally, my opinion is
that the concept of the reasonable person should be scrapped
entirely and replaced with "social norms". it's far more honest
that way. I don't believe a Reasonable Man exists; and attempts
to gauge "true intent" are quite difficult. Cognitive Science
will slowly chip away at "free will" until there is
justification provided (however 'insane' as it may be) that free
will simply does not exist. Once free will does not exist, then
no one is culpable for ANY crime. It's a slippery slope,
externalism combined with brain scans. Remove the impetus from
the man, and the man has no responsibility. But it's the
direction things are going. Oh well. Eventually Science will
likely take over the courts and i don't necessarily see that as
a good thing. Science is not ready to be in charge of society
just yet.
