rational naturalism is impossible!

[genkaus]

you miss the point. not all truth is necessary for survival, and in fact mild paranoia is better for survival than actual truth. if any of our reasoning skills are compromised, we would be unable to determine which ones. if that is the case, there can be no confidence in any of our reasoning skills because for all we know they are just as likely to be true as they are to be false since we can't reason which is more likely.

Are you ignoring my argument or do you just like repeating yourself?

All truth may not be necessary for survival, but a certain amount of truth is. Which is why we can safely say that our reasoning skills are capable of discerning the that amount of truth necessary for our survival. Which is also why we can have also have confidence in those reasoning skills.

If all of our reasoning capabilities were to be compromised, we wouldn't be able to discern any truth and thus not be able to survive. If we can, then that means some of them are working well enough to discern the truth and we can use those to evaluate and correct the others. This all or nothing idea is a false dichotomy.

true, it is possible they would be accurate for survival. but again, with some uncertainty of our reasoning skills we can't reason if they in fact are.

But our reasoning skills are not uncertain.