Why we so often want to prove ourselves right

5.1 Why greater intelligence can make it easier to defend our judgments

I have seen a familiar meeting unfold many times. A plan has been running for a while, the results are poor, and the figures are deteriorating. Someone finally asks whether the original direction might have been wrong. An experienced, quick-thinking colleague supplies several explanations: a changed market, inadequate execution, insufficient resources, a competitor's sudden move, customers needing more time.

Every explanation may be plausible and supported by some facts. The question is why, among the possibilities, we so readily accept those that protect the original judgment. An explanation can be possible without being the one most worth believing.

Intelligence supplies tools without choosing their purpose

Strong analytical ability often helps people understand complexity, notice variables, and find weaknesses in arguments. It does not determine what that ability will be used for. The same reasoning can ask where I might be wrong or explain why I remain right. Someone may challenge other people's judgments brilliantly while rarely applying the same sharpness to their own.

Searching for an answer and defending one can both look logical and evidence-based. The distinction is whether reality is allowed to test the answer or the answer is being used to explain away reality.