How pragmatic rationalism works in a nutshell

In response to a recent comment, a quick explanation of how my pragmatic rationalism ideology works was appropriate. For what its worth, here is a version of it for public consideration:

I don't usually start out contesting truth from anyone, especially someone I trust. That's the adversarial mindset. Some people deserve adversarial treatment because they earned it, e.g., by being demagogues, liars, crackpots, etc. Absent that, I'll just look into an issue or matter with as neutral and open a mind as I can muster. It helps to sense when a posited fact, truth or line of reasoning is unfamiliar but plausible, especially when it is inconvenient. Then I decide on the basis of facts, truths and my own human reasoning. Being a pragmatic rationalist means a three-step process. Facts and truths first, reasoning second, beliefs third.

If one starts with beliefs first, as most people seem to do most of the time, the influence of unconscious biases, ideologies and social pressure/situation, e.g., tribe loyalty, are more potent. Inconvenient facts and truths are more easily obscured, distorted and/or downplayed. Reasoning tends to get distorted to make beliefs more comforting and plausible. False/unjustifiable beliefs tend to remain intact.

Science has diagrammed the human foundation that gave rise to pragmatic rationalism. Inconvenient facts, truths, reasoning and beliefs are shown below in green, and the psychological-social discomfort they cause is shown in red. The human is highly motivated to make the discomfort at least appear to go away.