She is ignorant and doesn't even know it.

Today's OT and NT readings are hard to comment upon. Leviticus is a difficult read, and much of Leviticus is beyond me. I can see prohibitions against greed and selfishness in much of the laws that were made, but the laws culturally have little application to today's culture, except that they demonstrate obeisance to God.

The NT reading is quite similar to that which I have already blogged about in Matthew. Rather than be repetitive, I was thinking of not blogging at all.

But, after the Psalms reading, I came across this quote about Folly:

"She is ignorant and doesn't even know it."

Much of my life has been spent in the company of such people. And quite honestly, much of my life, perhaps even today and my future, can be summed up in this statement. Having failed so many times in the past, I would never call myself a "success" today, because my future self may easily show my present self to be highly incorrect, just as my present self is chagrined by the behavior of my past selves. This entry may come across as highly elitist, but I have often found a correlation between intellect and morality, or at least, humility.

This is not to say that highly educated people are always moral. I have known some incredibly smart people who revel in sinful and arrogant behavior, as immoral as possible. And I have known people of moderate intellect and education who are the most moral beings I have ever met.

But I have also met a "type" of person who is completely satisfied with his or her own behavior, and desires nothing more than continuing that behavior, despite seeing all the damage and destruction it causes in their life or in the lives of those who care about them. This person practices behavior that is both self-absorbed and immoral. And when presented with evidence why this behavior is somehow "wrong" (by the hurts they have caused to themselves and others, by its self-destructiveness, or simply by its incredible selfishness), they summarily reject the evidence without giving it any consideration.

It is that lack of consideration that is key to their intellectual limitation. I heard one time that the ability to hold two diametrically opposed ideas in one's mind at the same time is a mark of intellect. Consideration of evidence requires careful contemplation. It requires a deconstruction of "self" so that the evidence can be weighed outside of one's own selfish point of view, or inside a civic framework that may be at odds with one's own personal desires. Rather than taking the time to consider the evidence, the evidence is simply rejected.

It has been my experience that the people who are quickest to reject evidence such as this are often those who lack the intellectual capacity to consider it. Abstract thinking is beyond them. Psychological deconstruction is beyond them. It's similar to telling a child that it is wrong to take a candy bar without paying for it, and trying to explain yourself to the child by using Aristotelian philosophical principles. The mind is simply not there to contemplate the immorality of their actions, and so the rejection is immediate.

Most of the rejection comes from attitude. When a person is intellectually incapable of assessing evidence, they tend to wrap themselves in "what they know," which is usually only inside themselves. They are trapped in their own perspectives. Through an arrogant attitude, they reject what they cannot, physically, understand, and they continue with their immoral, un-wise behavior. It is the intellectual challenge they face that locks them into continuation of their un-wise behavior.

This entire personality type is summed up in the above quote. While ignorance may be from a lack of exposure, and have little to do with "intellect," it is Folly's ignorance that is incapable of self-awareness due to a lack of intellectual capacity. Many of us, myself a prime culprit, struggle along in life for years with tools that keep us from missing the mark. We may be intellectually gifted, but our psychological construction keeps us failing in life, until, by the grace of God, He assists us in finding a more moral path. But many also are incapable of finding that path by an attitude of willful rejection, simply due to a lack of ability to consider it. Trying to discuss morality with these people points out my own intellectual limitations. I find that if I were smarter, I'd be more capable of making my point, but I usually end up frustrated, and creating a counter-productive environment.

While presenting evidence to a "mocker," along with moral boundaries, I am branded as "legalistic." And if I relax a moral stance around Folly to reach that level, I feel like I am complacent and permissive of a sin that destroys that person. For the last 3,000 years, this type has existed, and Solomon knew that Folly, "loud and brash," would not know herself, and would continue this self-destructive, un-wise behavior in the setting of her intellectual limitations (she doesn't even know it).

So, when I am confronted with someone who is hurtful, and relatively limited in their intellectual capacity to understand themselves and their own hurtful behavior, I remind myself that I am just like that person.

I *am* that person. I always have been. I always will be.

To God, we are all the same. I am not "better" than that person. Far from it. Any intellectual gifts I may have just add to my responsibility to "get it right." My gifts simply make my fall that much more sinful. So, I try to stay on my own path, and trust God that He will, in the end, help us all.