Thanks for your very revealing response, Pierre. It’s almost like you’ve taken offence at what I’ve written. (Unless perhaps your response is intended as a joke!)
I’ll deal with one thing at a time:
“Implying that you have superior thinking skills than most of your audience is arrogance if you don’t also recognize that these skills are inferior to those of many.”
That does not seem to be logically correct. (See if you can work out why!) Additionally, however, I have not denied that other people may have superior thinking skills to my own.
“Just as you can’t tell where we stand on the intelligence scale, your reckoning of your position is only based on your less than humble opinion.”
It isn’t quite clear what point you are making by saying my reckoning is ‘only based’ on my opinion. My ‘reckoning’ is based on the evidence I have seen during my lifetime. It seems that is a perfectly reasonable thing to base my ‘reckoning’ on.
“Underlying your narrative is the premise that we sub par intellects should defer to your greater thinking powers.”
No. I don’t think you should ‘defer’ to my superior thinking powers. I think you should try to learn from them, instead of being arrogant.
“The lessons of history do not suggest to me that this is a sound strategy.”
You may ‘reckon’ that, but you provide no clear evidence or argument as to why you believe that to be the case. (Also: See above.)
“You can play thought games way above my pay grade all you want, I will humbly and courageously follow my own counsel in deciding how to live”
I wasn’t saying you shouldn’t follow your own counsel. I’m just suggesting it might be even better if you followed your own counsel, after first trying to be open-minded enough to learn from other people who might well be far more intelligent than you are.
Finally, let me ask you this: Do you accept that I might be far more intelligent than you are?