Within 24 hours of the challenger space shuttle disaster a psychologist asked over 100 students where they were and what they were doing when they heard what had happened. About 2½ years later he asked them the same questions. Only 10% gave the same answers.
People will readily accept the possibility of someone else's memory being false, and at the same time have absolute faith in their own memory (and beliefs). Arrogance.
So basically my position is that I am capable of questioning my own beliefs (and regularly do!). The opinions and conclusions I come to are therefore better thought out and more likely to be correct than the vast majority of other people's opinions. This is a logical position to take. The arrogant ones are the religious people and the people who don't admit the possibility of their brain playing tricks on them.
I'm often accused of being arrogant in my dismissal of religious beliefs.
I'm sure you will agree that it would be possible to gather together a group (large – over a hundred, anyway) of people, of equal intelligence and education, who all have (equally strong) religious beliefs that are incompatible with the religious beliefs of everyone else in the room.
In this group of equals, religion makes each and every one of them stand up and try to shout over the top of everyone else, “I am right, and everyone else is wrong”.
So, I ask you, who is really the arrogant one – I, who understand that my brain can play tricks, and dispassionately analyse the evidence before coming to my opinion, or the person with religious beliefs?Or maybe I'm just NPD ;)