So smart people don't know when they're wrong because they're smart enough to convince themselves that they're right, and dumb people don't know when they're wrong, because they're too dumb to see how dumb they're being. We can't win.

Yes, I think the lesson to take away is that you want not only to be smart, but also wise and humble. Wise enough to realize you need to poke holes in your ideas, humble enough to fix your hypothesis when facts change.

>wise and humble...you need to poke holes in your ideas...

But where does critical thinking come in? Seens there should be a heuristic or generalized approach for deciding what to believe. Epistemology, I suppose.

And this should all preface the formation of our ideas in the first place.

> You have to actively look for ways to disprove your own narratives

Socratic Method is one way, I can recommend "The Socratic Method - A Practitioners Handbook" by Ward Farnsworth.

Perfect; that sounds like exactly what I've observed - in others as well as myself - but I did not have a name, so now I can google better, thx :)

(any recommendations on that specific book?)

protip: you can do this without being overwhelmingly smart, too. You need only be smart enough to convince yourself

What book was that? I'd be interested in giving it a read.

Looking at my Audible history it was either Think Again by Adam Grant or Super Thinking by Gabriel Weinberg. Can't remember exactly.

Much obliged.