Faith and Inquiry

But is that believer a "logical" believer? My point is that if he were asked why he believes, he probably wouldn't be able to explain exactly why and what it means, but it wouldn't really bother him because he believes and that's it. Is such a belief logical?

I don't know what a logical or illogical believer is.

It will not be known whether this is what Daniel intended, but I know a man who I think would agree to die for the sanctification of God, and he believes what he says, because he was born an ultra-Orthodox Jew. He has no doubt that he cannot prove his faith, and the proofs are false, one can only believe by the work of the heart (a choice of a leap of faith), and certainly if he had been born a Muslim he would have remained there (with the information he has at the time).
Is such a person considered a believer?

Most people adopt the faith of their home. Even if this is done out of philosophical consideration (this can come in through the basic assumptions). Therefore, I do not think that such a person can be defined as someone who does not believe. The question of how much value this has is debatable.
I have written here in the past about the devotion of the Baalbatim and their questionable value in my opinion (the Hasid Yavetz).

Its value is questionable when if he examines it he will reach a different conclusion, but assuming that the researcher also believes in his mind but in his heart his faith will weaken then there is a contradiction between values, but the value is an apparent value. Isn't that so?

Sorry for introducing things that are not really related,
Ezra

I didn't understand.

He has an intuition about God.
But a religious person who does not investigate, in what other ways can he believe?
He has an intuition about what was given at Mount Sinai and about the authority of the Oral Torah.
Does he also have an intuition about the Zohar?

If he does not investigate and study, I do not see what tool he has to make decisions to believe other than inertia.

???

I will explain with 2 examples:
A person during the destruction period who learned and saw that he was allowed to remain among the ’enusim’ – Not only is there no value in ‘remaining stupid’. There is value in knowing the truth. (Even if it is worth giving up his life)

In contrast, a person who researched and demanded and came to the conclusion that the Torah believes, but exposure to different opinions, to various disbelieving sages, and to the ’greater world’ that disbelieves in God / the Torah, caused him to not be dedicated to the work of God because his faith in his heart weakened – then there is great value in ‘remaining stupid’ and not damaging something so important.
Example – A married man who will engage in reading studies about unfaithful women. Understandable is the damage he caused to his personal life.

Of course, there is also value in wisdom, and knowledge of the complexity of faith, but this is already a clash between 2 values, and we need to discuss what prevails. Perhaps each person for himself.