You see, I've seen the word "rationalism" used to mean all five of these things at different times:

The belief that we should come to know the world through reason and experimentation, shunning intuition.
The belief that we should come to know the world through reason and intuition, shunning experimentation.
The belief that we should come to know the world through knowledge of (and correction for) cognitive biases, and knowledge of (and correct use of) probability theory.
Being effective at believing things that are true and not things that are false.
Being effective at doing things that are good and not things that are bad.

In most of the mainstream philosophy I've read, the word "rationalism" has been used, without qualification, to mean the second of these, even though that type of rationalism strongly contradicts the stuff we call rationalism! One of my friends has freely used the word "rationalism" in conversation, referring to "our" rationalism, completely unaware that, to most people, the word means something completely different. Another of my friends said that he "hates rationalism with a passion"—and I have no idea which of these five things is the one he hates!

Given that "rationalism" to most people (or, at least, most philosophers) means something utterly unlike what it means to us, perhaps calling our philosophy "rationalism" is about as wise as developing a political philosophy, based on socialism but with nationalist influences, and calling it "national socialism".

I suggest that we use the word "sensibilism" instead, since nobody else is using it, it seems unobjectionable, and I think it captures what we're all about.

Edited to remove a proposed solution.

Edited to reinstate that proposed solution, since this discussion is presumably finished.