Justification for Foundational Belief

[Skepsis]

@Skep
Our senses don't have to be accurate or "right" they just have to be "good enough". What about the unreliability of sensory experience makes reality seem unlivable to you?

I'm wondering, do you trust your eyes out of faith, or by experience and corroboration? If you saw pixie floating in front of you would you reach out to touch it? Would you ask someone else if they saw the pixie as well? That would be leveraging quite a few senses right there (and those of others). I'm not sure that this qualifies as an exercise in faith by any definition. We seem hardwired both to accept and be skeptical even with regards to our own sensory experiences (and we reinforce that throughout our lives by multiple avenues). Personally, I think that's a fantastic practical compromise. Our senses are unreliable, at a point. However, time is of the essence with sensory experience, you can't be so bogged down with deciding whether or not you can trust your sensory experiences when they tell you danger is flying at your face as to be hit in the forehead before you decided whether or not the danger was real. While it is true that your senses cannot be trusted completely, most of us are unlikely to reach their breaking point in our day to day lives. It's only when we begin to exceed the normal range of operations for our senses that their unreliability becomes more and more pronounced. This isn't to say that they don't glitch constantly even in mundane and ordinary circumstances, but that these glitches are an "acceptable" trade-off for the measure of reliability that they can be expected to achieve, bugs and features..lol.

It seems to me that trusting my eyes out of experience and corroboration is equivalent to trusting my eyes on faith. Validating sensory input is accurate using sensory input is circular.
I am not asking this question for its practical application; I feel I have already laid out why it is necessary to accept sensory input as true. I am asking this question in hopes of attaining philosophical justification for the truth of basic belief.
I did say that sensory data is only sometimes accurate, did I not? If I didn't, I meant to.

---

Not trusting my senses is the very elixir of my life. My wife tells me regularly how unreliable my memory is, yet I seen to be able to struggle through sometimes in party mode.

I meant, of course, that not being able to trust your senses or memory at all would make reality unlivable. Similar to Schizophrenia, not being able to trust your senses or memory would be catastrophic.
Is there a proof for these truths, or are we only allotted their practicality and circular argumentation?
Is our intuition the only thing we have to justify these types of beliefs?