Being "rational" (doing "reasoning") is not the same as being "reasonable". > Being reasonable means holding beliefs and views for which (1) one can give true

Being "rational" (doing "reasoning") is not the same as being "reasonable". > Being reasonable means holding beliefs and views for which (1) one can give true or probable evidence that (2) actually (or sufficiently and relevantly) supports them. That's a definition of "rational", not "reasonable". Even the <title> tag of the page says "What it is to be rational", not "what it is to be reasonable". The author seems to be opposed to any commonly accepted definition of "reasonable" that isn't reducible to "rational". But if everyone else looks like they're mistaken about what a word means, maybe you're the one who's using the word incorrectly. Being "reasonable" is a fallback that we as a society endorse as a practical ideal, because we know that not everyone can be rational all the time. It'a vague and ambiguous concept because the goalpost moves depending on how rational the target group is typically expected to be in a given situation. This doesn't mean that we should throw away its nuances and replace it with the common denominator that is "rational". Many people believe that one can be reasonable without being fully rational, and vice versa. You can of course disagree with this proposition, but you can't just redefine a keyword to win the argument.