Many philosophers, psychologists, and lay people think that moral reasoning is a reliable way to find moral truth. I will survey evidence indicating that reasoning evolved and is well-designed to serve social functions such as reputation management and navigation within a complex world of accountability constraints. To maintain that moral reasoning is (or should be) more important or more trusted than moral intuition, in the absence of evidence that people can reason dispassionately about moral issues, meets Webster’s definition of a delusion: a false conception and persistent belief unconquerable by reason in something that has no existence in fact. I will show how rationalism has led the “new atheists” astray, causing them to misconstrue religion as a set of false beliefs about supernatural agents. I will present social intuitionism as an alternative to rationalism.