Intelligence does not guarantee truth

Isn’t it interesting how two equally intelligent and reasonable people can look at the same evidence and come to vastly different conclusions? What else is going on?

As I’ve presented arguments for theism over atheism, conservative morality over liberal interpretations, and Catholicism as something quite other than the one true church, I’m consistently confronted with the reality of brighter minds than I making a case for the opposing view. Without fail also, however, there are brighter minds who share my view and present it confidently. My relative intelligence aside, the fact I want to unpack is that the apprehension of truth is not based solely on knowledge and wisdom.

In an ideal world, one might suppose, attaining to a certain level of knowledge based on evidence would automatically lead to only one conclusion – the accurate one. The truth. But in the real world, the path to truth is filled with forks in the road, each representing a qualifier, something that determines which way you will go.

Worldview is a major fork. So, for instance, in determining the true moral value of same-sex marriage, a worldview that has God as the sovereign moral Lawgiver will take you one direction, a secular humanist worldview will take you the other. One may object, well…what about the theists who have joined with the humanists in claiming SSM to be good and right? That’s where the other forks come in.

Actually…I envision it more as a flowchart. Like this:

Now, this is oversimplified, of course, and a tad frivolous. But you get the picture. Human beings are complex creatures with multi-varied experiences and life influences. The beliefs we hold, the positions we take, and the decisions we make are shaped by them all.

Moral of the story: Bright does not make right.