What is the difference between Rationalism and Realism(philosophy)?

Rationalism:

In epistemology and in its modern sense, rationalism is "any view appealing to reason as a source of knowledge or justification" (Lacey 286). In more technical terms, it is a method or a theory "in which the criterion of the truth is not sensory but intellectual and deductive" (Bourke 263). Different degrees of emphasis on this method or theory lead to a range of rationalist standpoints, from the moderate position "that reason has precedence over other ways of acquiring knowledge" to the more extreme position that reason is "the unique path to knowledge" (Audi 771). Given a pre-modern understanding of reason, "rationalism" is identical to philosophy, the Socratic life of inquiry, or the zetetic (skeptical) clear interpretation of authority (open to the underlying or essential cause of things as they appear to our sense of certainty). In recent decades, Leo Strauss sought to revive Classical Political Rationalism as a discipline that understands the task of reasoning, not as foundational, but as maieutic. Rationalism should not be confused with rationality, nor with rationalization.

Realism:

Contemporary philosophical realism is the belief that our reality, or some aspect of it, is ontologically independent of our conceptual schemes, linguistic practices, beliefs, etc. Realism may be spoken of with respect to other minds, the past, the future, universals, mathematical entities (such as natural numbers), moral categories, the material world, or even thought. Realism can also be promoted in an unqualified sense, in which case it asserts the mind-independent existence of a visible world, as opposed to idealism, skepticism and solipsism. Philosophers who profess realism state that truth consists in the mind's correspondence to reality.

Realists tend to believe that whatever we believe now is only an approximation of reality and that every new observation brings us closer to understanding reality.[1] In its Kantian sense, realism is contrasted with idealism. In a contemporary sense, realism is contrasted with anti-realism, primarily in the philosophy of science.

"Rationalism" is the idea that empirical evidence is not too important once you have had a few experiences; that from those experiences you can induce or deduce any other thing.

Realism is the idea that empirical reality exists independently of your mind. For that reason, many, but not all, Rationalists are Idealists, which says empirical reality is mostly (or all) created by the mind.

Rationalism is contrasted with Empiricism. Most, but not all Empiricists, are Realists.

Epistemological objectivism (see Montague) is Realism. Kant's epistemology is a variation of ancient Greek Idealism, which says objective reality exists, but it's not the 'real' reality. That is where we get the fallacy that our perceptions are illusions: Plato said we could see that 'real reality' because they were the Forms in the world of the Gods; Kant said the 'real reality' was in his invention of "Noumena". But both men agreed that material reality did exist independently of the mind.

This is an intriguing question, quite interesting.......rationalism is though processes due to logic, and realism is what happens to those who end up in prison, get real or you will get real. Realism is reality, keep it real, getting real is not going up against the winds, going against the grains of the pavements and curbs, so, thank you.