There's nothing irrational about honestly believing the group-consensus if you don't have the skill foundation to see how it could be wrong.
Actually he is right. Just because you can't find a flaw with common consensus dosen't mean you are ignorant or stupid because its perfectly possible there is no flaw with common consensus on a particular subject or that the flaw is too difficult to detect by the means available to you. Perhaps its too difficult to detect the flaw with the means the entire society has available to it!
A rational agent is not an omniscient agent after all!
I think you may be letting yourself slightly adversarial in your thinking here because you perceive this as a fight over a specific thing you estimate society is delusional about. Its not, its really not. Chill man. :)
Edit: Considering the downvotes, I just want to ask what I missing in this comment? Thanks for any help!
This is thread where I'm trying to figure out a few things about signalling on LessWrong and need some information, so please immediately after reading about the two individuals please answer the poll. The two individuals:
A. Sees that an interpretation of reality shared by others is not correct, but tries to pretend otherwise for personal gain and/or safety.
B. Fails to see that an interpretation of reality is shared by others is flawed. He is therefore perfectly honest in sharing the interpretation of reality with others. The reward regime for outward behaviour is the same as with A.
To add a trivial inconvenience that matches the inconvenience of answering the poll before reading on, comments on what I think the two individuals signal,what the trade off is and what I speculate the results might be here versus the general population, is behind this link.