In the continuing debate about Intelligence, IQ, Wisdom, Smarts, and Education, I would like to add in a neglected bit. The assumptions one starts from may be more important than one's formal intelligence. Consider: the Soviet Union had many scientists who were smarter than I am, some in general, and many many more in specific training. Yet they exiled or even killed those who would not start from the correct Stalinist assumptions, so all the remaining ones were a restricted pool. So they got many things deeply wrong.
Still, they were brilliant people. In those fields where they could keep away from the inquisitors, such as historical linguistics, they exceeded the efforts of those in the West who were under the thumb of different assumptions here.
Similarly, the State Department, CIA, FBI, NSA, Military Intelligence and other agencies contain many, many people who know more than I do and some who are smarter than I am to begin with. Yet if they do not start from correct assumptions, they will reach bad conclusions, and doubly bad because 1) they have pre-emptively defended those positions against criticism already, though starting from a point too far downstream makes this useless, and 2) they cannot listen to critics who do not know the details they do.
When I speak with family members who do not know much about mental health, or newish Christians or Seekers who do not know much theology, Bible, or church history, or newcomers in many fields I know something about, I don;t find it hard to be patient in my explanations and assiduous in trying to create clear analogies. Where I get irritated is with people who think they know something, yet who have started from wrong assumptions that they seem unable to question.
I'm not good with that.