I typically class these types of questions with other similar ones:

What are the odds that a strategy of approximately continuous insanity, interrupted by clear thinking, is a better evolutionary adaptation than continuous sanity, interrupted by short bursts of madness? That the first, in practical, real-world terms, causes me to lead a more moral or satisfying life? Or even, that the computational resources that my brain provides to me as black boxes, can only be accessed at anywhere near peak capacity when I am functioning in a state of madness?

Is it easier to be sane, emulating insanity when required to, or to be insane, emulating sanity when required to?