'How do I trust that giving up the 'do-er' will be for the greatest good?' Listener question

 I always find “no doer” confronting but I did feel resonance with the very end of the talk that even self inquiry might be doomed until the doer is made more transparent. As you know, I struggle with the Witness as I find that term to be nihilistic. An entity or process that just observes is passive with no power.
  The truth is I rarely see this logic that you say is so obvious. I am aware that motor functions occur before the conscious mind is even aware, yet the artificial intelligence movement has created machines with far less power than the brain that do take responsibility for actions based on sensors. Maybe that metaphor fits your dialog also, but the obvious logic is really not obvious (I had this problem throughout HOME as well).
  I suppose my greatest problem with “no doer” is that it requires Faith that in giving up the doer all of this wonderful accountability and Wisdom will appear to align the mind and body to its greatest good (healthy behaviors, compassion, happiness for no cause, etc,). This has always been my only obstacle to fully understanding Syd Banks remarkable teachings, which you know I view as life-saving for me. 
   What is the evidence for this Faith? What is the evidence that this Wisdom and accountability that appears will protect the doer as best as it can be done so the doer can let go. Or if we don’t have any evidence, how does one actually take the leap?