I try to, with varying degrees of success. I do have intuition and trust, and assorted other faculties, but I've learned from experience not to trust intuition until I've reasoned through what it seems to be telling me. I'm interested in knowing what's actually true, not what I'd like to be true, and I know far too much about the myriad ways human cognition and perception can be led astray to trust untested claims. I'd rather not know than believe something that's not true. I won't accept something as true just because it might be comforting or it explains a whole lot of otherwise inexplicable things, it has to pass the tests of critical thinking. There are six of them, which I got from an excellent thinker named James Lett, I routinely apply to any claim.You talk as if "reason" is the only human faculty. You don't possess intuition? You don't possess trust? You navigate your entire life via reason?
1. Any true claim must in principle be falsifiable, it must be possible to at least imagine evidence that would prove it to be wrong. Otherwise the evidence in its favour doesn't matter either, it's invulnerable to any kind of evidence.
2. The argument in support of the claim must be logical and consistent.
3. The evidence offered must be comprehensive, you have to consider all the evidence, not just that which supports the claim.
4. Any test or experiment must be replicated by others, with consistent results.
5. The evidence and reasoning offered must be sufficient to establish the truth of the claim.
6. You must assess the evidence and arguments honestly, without bias or preconceptions.
Any claim that fails any of those tests deserves to be rejected. Passing them all doesn't necessarily mean something must be true in any absolute sense, but it does mean you're justified in placing considerable confidence in it; you've sold your belief for a fair price, it hasn't been stolen from you by frauds and charlatans. Paranormal and supernatural claims, in which I include religious claims, fail them all. They are emotive claims that can provide insight into someone's personality and values and history, but they are, in the fine phrase of a former teacher of mine, propositionally vacuous.