Earlier quoted context omitted.
To play devil's advocate, what is to come of deliberating on existential meaning at great length? Do you think you'll find an answer, rationally speaking (that is, using the tools of reason and logic)? Notably, Godel's incompleteness theorems suggest these tools may be insufficient. More specifically, if you try to rationally "justify" what you ought to be doing, you will always be able to - legitimately! - impugn it…
Have you not met anyone who went through a period of questioned assumptions, got to their answers, and consciously chose a path that fulfills them? Those seem to be the happiest people around. Many people who have gone through this process do end up at the answers of family, or helping others. I'm unclear from your writing if you accept those answers as valid, or if you are being dismissive of those answers and assum…
The irrational or rational mind compares the experiences of others as a measure for their own happiness when they feel that something is not right.
Going by what feels right works as long as there is positive reinforcement otherwise it will have a negative side effect on life. Some people aren't for example aware of choices others have made in their life because they don't focus on them, those choices lead them to happiness or better standing ground but for others, those choices that aren't in their control leading to a very negative event may disproportionately affect them and questioning.
You can't control for your initial years or childhood and That I think has the biggest impact on whether you will come across solving it.
It feels right to cry out in misery but rational or irrational mind would think it might be pointless if for however long you cry, no one comes to help or nothing improves.
I don't know what is considered rational or irrational thing to do given anything may seem rational for someone in specific circumstances and irrational for bystander. Is there such a thing as objective rationality that can be verified?