Atheism, Theism, Science & Philosophy

[Love]

Does it (require supplementation), to what end?

You might be interested to know that it is empircism that is absolutely fundamental to the scientific method, not rationalism. Pure reason alone is useless in science, primarily because repeatable experiments are required to test hypotheses and predictions (in order to disprove a theory). Another good example is "empathy". I believe that the subjective experience of empathy is entirely beyond the scope of reason. Rationalism can be used to theoretically reflect the concept of empathy, but more sense can be made of empathy if one supplements pure reason with Husserl's phenomenology, for example.

Not all opinions require "truth". For example, if I say chocolate and you say vanilla, both are true, both are subjective, and no supplementing of reason need be applied.

You could have used a better example than something that is so obviously subjective and trivial. There are some intense topics, in which people do hold vehement "black and white" viewpoints that they hold as true or right. Examples: "abortion is wrong" or "Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is the only correct interpretation". These black and white opinions do obviously exist, and feel very true to the eye of the beholder.