[alebron]

I has a theory:

Imagine you've always been smarter (more informed, better with logic, etc) than just about everyone else around you. In any non-stupid argument with a random person, you're a favorite to be right. Years and years of this conditions you (in a Bayesian way), when in a disagreement, to assume that the other person is wrong, since most of the time they actually are. Saves you a lot of time, and it usually works out for you. Over the years, as you get older, you get lazy. You think up some notion, mess around with it in your head for a while, it passes the smell test, so you believe it to be true. You publish it, and someone (whether smart or dumb doesn't matter, but probably smart) argues that it's false. Since, from your point of view, he's likely to be wrong, you assume you're right and figure out what it was, other than the idea itself, that made this person mistakenly believe you're wrong. Hence all the evasion.

It's hard be aware of and to fight that process. Average or dumb people don't have this problem almost at all, since they're wrong much more often, so the Bayesian engine doesn't get to work its magic nearly as much.