Certainty leaves us unwilling to change beliefs when we’re wrong

By David McElroy · May 1, 2022

I’ve probably been wrong more often than anybody I know.

I like to think that’s simply because I know my own thoughts. I know all the times when I’ve come to a firm conclusion about something — only to be forced to change what I believe as I learn more and gain more wisdom.

Maybe a lot of other people feel the same inside. Maybe they’ve seen themselves take dogmatic positions and then had to admit — at least to themselves — that they were wrong.

I fear, though, that most people believe they’ve rarely been wrong. At least about the “big things.”

I have a feeling that most people believe they were taught the truth early in life — because they happened to be born into the only group which was right — or else they broke away from whatever they were taught as children. Those in that second group seem to believe that whatever they decided to believe at that point in life is the truth.

Most people seem to believe they have life figured out. Most have little interest in understanding why other people see reality differently than they do. Even those who want to be honest and consistent in their beliefs resist change, because pride leaves us afraid to change when we discover we’ve been wrong.

I know what that feels like. That’s the way I lived for years. I was rarely wrong — in my own mind — because I rarely changed what I believed. One of the hardest things I ever learned is that growth and wisdom required me to accept that I’ve been wrong about much of what I’ve believed.

What’s more, I’m still wrong about some of the things I believe. I simply don’t know yet which of my beliefs are wrong.

I’m not saying we shouldn’t try to determine what’s true. I’m not suggesting there aren’t values and truths which aren’t worthy of defending. I’m not even saying there’s no such thing as objective truth.

All I’m saying is that there’s no reasonable chance that I’ve correctly discovered all objective truth. (And there’s no reasonable chance you’ve discovered truth about everything, either.) That doesn’t mean we should stop trying to determine the truth. It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t push back against ideas which we believe are wrong or evil.

But it does mean we have to be honest with ourselves. It means we have to stop letting our pride get in the way when facts or reason show us we’ve been wrong. It means we have to be more committed to The Truth — whatever it is — than we are to defending whatever we’ve been taught or that we’ve decided to believe.

For me, this means that I will explain my ideas and beliefs as clearly as I can, but if someone is genuinely able to show me the errors in my thinking, I have to be grateful, not angry or in denial.

I’ve had to change my beliefs about so many things over the years. A lot of what I was taught as a child was wrong or incomplete. I’ve found myself wrong over the years about things which I never consciously decided — things I just absorbed from my culture or family. At other times, I’ve had to repeatedly modify things I’ve changed as I found new ways of seeing and interpreting my experiences.

When I was a teen-ager, I thought I had everything figured out about theology and politics and culture. I wasn’t mature enough to realize that I had simply absorbed everything I was told by my family and church and culture.

What my family believed was right. What my country practiced was moral and good. What my culture believed was best for everyone. And what my church taught was the truth about everything.

But reality is far more complicated than that. As time went on, I found errors and contradictions in things I’d been taught. I discovered factual inputs which completely changed my perspective on many things which had seemed settled and decided to me back then.

Eventually, I had to say to myself, “This is what I believe to be truth right now, but I trust God and reason and my experience to show me where I’m wrong.”

That’s not always easy. There have been times when I’ve had to reject cherished beliefs and tell people that I’ve been wrong. But the more often I practice this — and the more often I set aside my ego — the easier it is.

I still don’t like to be wrong. There are times when my ego still tries to stop me from being intellectually honest. But there’s a lot more peace about living this way, even though I know I’ll still have to face additional errors in the future. I’ve gotten to the point that I’d rather say, “I strongly believe that I’m right about this, but it’s possible I’ll turn out to be wrong.”

And that’s still not always easy.

As a Christian, I believe deeply in the concept of redemption, but I think we have looked at redemption far too narrowly. Redemption isn’t only the process of God saving a creature — in the afterlife — who he’s made and who he loves. Redemption is about that creature bringing himself into alignment with all truth.

Aligning with truth has required me to find a lot of things which I didn’t intend to find. It’s required me to change myself in all sorts of ways. It’s required me to quiet my ego and to pursue honesty and love at times when it didn’t seem convenient.

I don’t yet understand all truth. I doubt I ever will in this lifetime. But wherever I find truth — no matter what I had previously believed — that’s where I find God.

Because God is the author of all truth and all love. And bringing myself into alignment with God in all of these ways — in love and in truth — is a work of redemption which I’ll still be completing on the day that I die.

Share on Social Networks

If you have problems with high blood pressure, I’d like to encourage you to consider making serious changes to your diet. There might be some people who don’t have any choice but to start taking prescription medications for high blood pressure, but I’d like to tell you that I have completely eliminated my issue by eliminating all sugar and almost all carbohydrates. (A couple of months ago, my blood pressure hit 185/144, which was dangerously high — considered stage 3 hypertension.) By completely changing my eating habits, I’m down 22 pounds and my blood pressure is now in the “ideal” range — without taking any medication. In addition, I sleep better and I have more energy. Getting away from the sugar-laden mess that we generally refer to as “highly processed food” has been a life-changer for me. Now my challenge is to avoid slipping back into old habits — by eating in the dangerous ways that almost everyone in our society has come to see as normal.

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

Related Posts