I think we should also look not on believe itself, but in the way it is pesented, for example if a person knows that his believe is untypical and that publicly claiming it could damage his reputation.
For example if one say: “I give 1 per cent probability to very unusual idea that pyramids was built for X, because I read Y” it will be good signaling about his intelligence.
Another thing is that if we search entire internet history of a person for most stupid claim he ever did, we will be biased to underestimate his intelligence.
I think we should also look not on believe itself, but in the way it is pesented, for example if a person knows that his believe is untypical and that publicly claiming it could damage his reputation.
For example if one say: “I give 1 per cent probability to very unusual idea that pyramids was built for X, because I read Y” it will be good signaling about his intelligence.
Another thing is that if we search entire internet history of a person for most stupid claim he ever did, we will be biased to underestimate his intelligence.
Especially for the most stupid claim of a prolific writer, ie a blogger.