How Facts Get us in Trouble

I found this article in the Boston Globe this week, and I thought it was very interesting.

How facts backfire

It explains how human beings are likely to disbelieve or ignore facts that contradict their currently held beliefs, ignoring things like 'there weapons of mass destruction in Iraq' or 'immigration is on balance economically helpful to native born citizens' which seem to be completely true.  As someone who considers himself open minded and politically aware, its got me thinking about the spiritual discipline of humility-
It is quite likely that I am wrong about many things that I believe to be true, and that I am resistant to correction when I am informed about my error.

Here's as test-see if you can find something this week where you are wrong, and change your mind.  If you tend to lean liberal, here's a Wall Street Journal article with some economic claims it suggests are true that liberals are likely to disagree with (I confess, I'm liberal enough that I disagree with some, but not all of their conclusions, so I may pick one for my own spiritual discipline).
If you lean conservative, the current senate minority leader, Mitch McConnell believes that the Bush tax cuts did not decrease revenue, because of the supply side effects of the program. This chart begs to differ.

But what I'm really interested in is the ways this might influence me as a Mennonite in particular.  My most radical belief is a deep skepticism in the power of violence to solve problems. I think that wars are a poor use of human resources, that diplomacy is grossly neglected in our society, and that saber rattling is dangerous and counter-productive.  I have talked with Mennonite friends who discuss how counter-productive it is to have guns in the home for self-defense (they are more likely to be used on family members than intruders), that the death penalty does not deter violent crime, and that war always inspires more violence.

I think many of these things are true.  But I also think that to some extent, if I rely on these arguments, I'm likely to end up looking silly when the facts, which at the very least suggest that violence can save innocent lives in the long run, and at the very least is necessary for a civilized society such as we enjoy in the western world in the form of police if not military, turn against me.  I wonder if I believe some of  my more prosaic arguments for pacifism exist more because I am looking for things to buttress my beliefs than a clear exploration of reality.

I think its worth asking, would you believe in non-violence, even if you were in a situation where violence would be practically wise, simply because it is the sacrificial path of the prince of peace.