[AnimalMuppet]

> If reason is indeed an automatic process, it doesn't imply that it's unreliable or untrustworthy.

But it doesn't imply that it's reliable and trustworthy, either.

Humans didn't evolve to do pure logic correctly in order to find absolute truth. They evolved to get good enough answers fast enough in order to survive. We think our logic is accurate... but maybe that's just so that, given a "good enough" answer, we move with confidence rather than doubt.

But as you mention, there's more than just pure logic. There's also evaluating evidence and information. (Sometimes there's too little, and sometimes there's too much. Which pieces do you believe?) It seems to me that this involved choice, and so the question of whether you can choose is directly relevant.

Even if that isn't directly relevant, I would say that if you are determined (that is, have no free will), and you judge the evidence badly, it is going to be very hard to show you that you judged the evidence badly. You judged it the only way you could; how can someone show you that you are wrong?