I think the amount of "faith" you need in logic depends on what you think logic really is. (I'm using my definition of faith here, not yours.) If you understand logic as a system by which patterns in our observations repeat and stay constant, the confidence comes from observation, not from superstition or "faith."People have to have some confidence in something in this world being true or they would go insane. People have to put faith in logic, which is simply the ability to reason from perceptions. But since people's perceptions can be wrong, people's logic can be wrong.
While it's true that people's perceptions can be inaccurate, logic only claims to work within these perception, flawed or not. You can make an analogy to lock picking. (Bear with me.) If someone screws around with your lock (perceptions), you adjust the lock pick. No one would claim that their lock pick will open all future/other locks, they would just claim that this pick works for this lock. If you fix your lock, you adjust the pick. In the same way, one doesn't need faith in logic because logic isn't intended to work with all future perceptions, just the perceptions we currently have.
As an aside, I find it amusing that you use logic to cast doubt on logic.
Seems like this would still be a problem, since science is based on logic. I still disagree for the reasons set forth, though.Thankfully science and other systems of methodology correct for a lot of the error in human perceptions, but it is still possible to derive incorrect knowledge. Therefore people accept the knowledge derived from science and logic, on faith.
To me, this is really a perversion of logic, not a derivation. I think by "original logic" you mean "original argument" based on logic. Either way, people who believe things because they can't be DISproven are in fact rejecting logic, not embracing it. To fully embrace the principle (and logic) that that which cannot be proven can/must exist would lead one to believe in all unfalsifiable theories like fairies and leprechauns.Faith on the other hand, is derived from logic. People reasoned at one point there is a God, and since no one has been able to prove it isn't true, people can continue to accept that original logic on faith. To me, they just seem like two sides to the same coin.