Question

Hello and blessings to the honored Rabbi, may he live long and well.
I read the Rabbi’s approach to God’s providence in our time, and recently I noticed that everyone who followed the path of inquiry and logic reached conclusions close to your view (like Maimonides, for example, according to certain explanations). By contrast, in the Hasidic path of the Baal Shem Tov they reached the complete opposite conclusion — namely, that there is providence over each and every thing down to the finest detail (where a blade of grass will fall, and the like).
Why not submit to the accepted view handed down through the generations, מתוך the understanding that we are not wise enough to understand God? That logic will not always be correct with regard to God, for “My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways.”
True, the Rabbi speaks a great deal about the fact that one should not throw away one’s intellect, and perhaps in the dilemma the Rabbi has presented several times about the period of the Enlightenment — whether to be a stupid righteous person or a smart wicked person — I believe the Rabbi would advise someone who came to consult him (on this matter) to be a smart wicked person.
Likewise, let us suppose that the Baal Shem Tov is right, and indeed there is providence over every single detail with exact precision — does the Rabbi not think that shame and disgrace will seize him after the coming of the Messiah, when it is revealed that all the Baal Shem Tov’s words are true and just? You can call my words “cheap demagoguery,” but you can also call them “a possible scenario.” What does the Rabbi think he would do in such a situation?
That is, suppose that in a few years you discover that your whole conception of providence and prayer was mistaken — would that change anything for you? Would it cause you to value logic less in relation to God? Would it cause you to go more with innocence and not only with rationalism? Or despite everything would you remain of the opinion that a person should rely on his “wisdom” and follow it through to the end?
 
(I am not speaking at all about the issue of autonomous halakhic ruling, which is a separate topic and not what my words are about.)