In general, no. If we blindly trusted our brains, we would not require things like “another set of eyes,” or the rigors of reproducibility, or business processe

In general, no. If we blindly trusted our brains, we would not require things like “another set of eyes,” or the rigors of reproducibility, or business processes/protocols, or a million other things. Further more, this lack of trust in the matter between our ears is observable in the course of daily human life when such questions are asked as “why did I say that?” or “why did I do that?”. Blind trust would obviate the need for such questions. As for the supposed trust in authority that you describe, that is not blind trust in the brain. Trust in authorities is actually quite low at the moment, and was never really blind. Every election in the USA, half of the country doesn’t trust the people elected, and possibly even the election itself. More over, War is no longer declared, and people never blindly trusted the government on war anyway, hence all of the protests of all of the wars. Trusting scientists is clearly not a universal thing either, hence the need for reproducibility as well as very large minorities of people not trusting rather obviously provable stuff (like landing on the moon where nearly any ham radio operator could tell you we did). Even if trust were not low, trusting an authority is built of many things. Brain washing, propaganda, protocol/process, committees, culture, tradition, instinct, and many more things all work together to form obedience to authority… trust in the brain isn’t much of a requirement in obeisance to authority figures.