If practical rationality is constrained by the human good, then agents with deviant but internally consistent desires are irrational by definition, conflating evaluative and rational failure.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Conflating: Conflating means mixing together or treating two different things as if they were the same thing, when they're actually distinct. It's a logical error where someone blurs important differences between concepts, ideas, or situations to make an argument seem stronger than it is. For example, conflating "being critical of a policy" with "being disloyal to your country" wrongly equates two separate things.
Constrained by(as used in logic and reasoning): Limited or controlled by something; prevented from going beyond certain boundaries.
Deviant desires(as used in philosophy of mind and ethics): Wants or goals that are unusual, unconventional, or go against what most people consider normal or healthy.
Evaluative failure(as used in ethics): Getting it wrong about what's actually good or bad—having poor judgment about values.
Human good

Based on where you are in your exploration

What's actually beneficial and valuable for human flourishing—things like health, happiness, meaningful relationships, and personal growth.

Internally consistent(as a requirement the framework meets)

Free from contradictions within itself; the different parts don't contradict each other.

Irrational by definition(as used in logic and epistemology)

Something that is automatically considered unreasonable or illogical based on how we've defined the terms, not because of what it actually does.

practical rationality(Distinguished from theoretical rationality in the context of Pascal's Wager)

The normative standard requiring an agent to maximize expected utility

rational failure(failure to recognize ontological commitments)

When someone who is reasoning correctly or logically still fails to understand or recognize something.

This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.