Taylor’s proof

In the SD
Hello Rabbi,
I am reading the fourth notebook you wrote with interest. I saw that you brought Taylor’s argument, and you did well to explain it this way:
“Any such skeptic should ask himself whether he trusts his eyes? Is the fact that he sees something enough to convince him that this thing actually exists out there? If so, let him step back and examine himself: If he does indeed believe in a spontaneous process responsible for the formation of eyes (evolution), then there is no way to justify the trust he places in them. Just as someone who believes that the stones on the hill were arranged by chance cannot trust the message they convey to us, since in his opinion this is a mere coincidence. The connection between the shape of the stones and the state of affairs in the world could be anything (if anything). Similarly, someone who thinks that eyes are the result of blind chance cannot trust the information they convey to him.”
My question is why it is not possible to say that a person trusts his eyes and the rest of his organs as a result of experience! That is, he grows up with them from an early age and simply notices that they guide him correctly! It may be that at first (i.e. when he is a baby) he does not trust them, but experimentation and wondering over the years lead him to the unequivocal conclusion that they are right. (This is not similar to the possibility you raised there that he assumes this because he is uncomfortable being skeptical).
Of course, this itself proves that the eyes were created intentionally and intelligently in the direction of the “philosophical” proof (the physical-theological view), but seemingly this undermines the “theological” direction presented there.
I would appreciate the Rabbi’s explanation.
Thank you and Happy Shabbat!