There's some saying. That a bottle empty or a bottle full will make no sound when shaken; but a bottle half full is always the loudest.
Your friend who just started working at HP probably knows just as much about HP's decision to spin off its PC division as you do. Everything he knows he got from the media, and maybe a generic company-wide email that has also been leaked to the media. Yet the fact that he works at HP gives him instant credentials on this subject matter. Blegh, right?
But I've been guilty of this myself. I've been polygraphed twice, and I often talk as if I know all about polygraphs. But the statistics I cite (precision, recall) come from what I've read online, and has nothing to do with me having been polygraphed.
You take a course on evolutionary biology, and suddenly you're arguing with some christian who takes the first few chapters of Genesis literally. You read a few news articles that cite some random climate scientists, and all of a sudden you're indignant at anyone who doesn't believe in climate change. I'm guilty of all of the above. Sometimes my ill-founded conclusions turn out to be true, sometimes not.
But what if you really are an expert in something? You've devoted your entire life to studying physics; not only that, it turns out you're one of the best physicists (if not the best physicist) in the world? I would argue that's even more dangerous, because surely no one can deny your right to be proud. And then you go and use your physics credentials to comment on something like the existence of God. Sure, there are some interesting arguments to be made using physics, but an expertise in one area often provides a false conviction in another.
But wait. What if you devote your entire life to the study of philosophy, of religion, of history, of everything and anything pertaining to the question you are trying to answer. Surely your convictions are well-founded then?
It was said that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. But the same might also be said of the wise man. Or the knowledgeable man. For knowledge, and pride, often blind us.
The wise will be shown to be fools, and the fools, wise. It is easy to look down at the christian who blindly believes without questioning. Who blindly serves. Who takes incorrect theology for granted. But who's to say he is the real fool? For maybe he is wise and you are the fool.
Someone said that he'd rather go to hell intentionally, than to stumble into heaven by accident. And really, that notion is appealing. My first reaction was to say, I agree! But wow, such hubris. To assume that the outcome of our lives, even our intellectual contemplations, are dictated by our intentions. And to claim that the child-likeness of someone else's faith is not intentional.
