I definitely applaud the effort.

Your paradigm does seem to me to support the position that rationally accepting the givens of material existence is no different from non-rationally accepting immaterial truths in the form of sacral/theological or secular/ideological beliefs--a position I vociferously reject. That forecloses, for me, locating myself within it.

At the same time, though material reality must be given its due by people within material existence--or suffer the material consequences--that does not generate any necessity to declare invalid any immaterial truth ( i.e., first two "Examples of Discernment" under "Key Points for Layer 2"). Rationality must prevail in matters related to material existence, but non-rational truths can still be maintained where there is no contradiction--such as a person who accepts that global warming is a fact of material existence that must be materially addressed but still believes everything the Bible says about Jesus to be true.