mathmatics of strategy: contradiction?

i have really been wrestling with this issue for awhile.

i see most poker books somewhat apologizing for all the math, but i find the math pretty elementary and very necessary.

but then there are all kinds of statements and so forth that aren't proven mathematically or with simulation (although i'm sure the authors have done or could do it)

but assume i have KK or QQ. pretty much most books say raise to thin the field...... that's fine, but do i really want 37o folding or A7 folding or pretty much most hands folding?? i know the answer is yes, because i see it recommended so much. but isn't the 37o player making a huge mistake calling my KK or QQ, when that player is making a huge mistake.

basically, that's my question. i want to thin the field with KK (or maybe QQ is a better example?) but aren't my opponents making a huge mistake calling my large raise with really any cards (other than AA)??

i get the idea when you have 4 callers of huge raise, then the probability skyrockets in terms of you being beat on flop, but you are also fantastic odds with a very strong hand, so i'd think that would be o.k. too.

i guess the problem in no-limit is that not knowing where you stand can be very expensive. limit isn't so bad, just call it down with your strong hand at worst.

any thoughts? and, i've read alot and played alot, just have never seen any mathematical proofs or simulations on this, it's just given as gospel (don't get me wrong, it's given by experts as such)

don't i want my opponent to make mistakes (ala sklansky)? and i'd say calling with about 99.5 of hands is a mistake (maybe suited connectors are ok with enough other callers)

thanks in advance for any responses!