One approach would be to identify as someone who believes whatever is correct, rather than as someone who believes particular positions X, Y, Z. That might have some value. However, it might then make it painful to confront the possibility that you might have been wrong, which could motivate you to interpret new evidence in a way that favors your existing beliefs, or to avoid looking for new evidence.
So probably a better approach is to identify as someone who always goes through proper reasoning and epistemic behaviors (always, or at least usually). Someone who is happy to pick up new evidence, and cares more about doing proper reasoning than about reaching a particular conclusion; someone who will cheerfully admit that a belief was wrong, and would find it more embarrassing to admit “I stuck to that belief longer than I should have”.
One approach would be to identify as someone who believes whatever is correct, rather than as someone who believes particular positions X, Y, Z. That might have some value. However, it might then make it painful to confront the possibility that you might have been wrong, which could motivate you to interpret new evidence in a way that favors your existing beliefs, or to avoid looking for new evidence.
So probably a better approach is to identify as someone who always goes through proper reasoning and epistemic behaviors (always, or at least usually). Someone who is happy to pick up new evidence, and cares more about doing proper reasoning than about reaching a particular conclusion; someone who will cheerfully admit that a belief was wrong, and would find it more embarrassing to admit “I stuck to that belief longer than I should have”.