

The 10 Signs of Intellectual Honesty - hhm
http://www.thedesignmatrix.com/content/the-10-signs-of-intellectual-honesty/

======
alecco
If there were a logic nazi for every ten grammar nazis the Internets would be
such a better place.

<hides>

~~~
walterk
Logic is good, but in my experience, it's virtually impotent in the face of
intellectual dishonesty (and this is a great list). If the person you're
arguing against is so invested in their opinion that they're unwilling to
seriously consider the possibility that they might be wrong, then your appeal
to logic, no matter how clear or rigorous, will fall on deaf ears.

But more important than even logic, in my opinion, is sense, which is the
stuff on which logic is based. But it's also the basis for much else that
makes up what we call "judgment", which relies on considerably more than the
exercise of good logic.

After having my ideology overturned many a time, from conservatism to
socialism to objectivism to liberalism, I've learned that the best
intellectual policy is to simply assume that even your most strongly held
beliefs are wrong, and attempt vigorously to prove it.

~~~
lsc
the thing is, if joe average thought less of people for being intellectually
dishonest, joe average would be in a much better place. Instead of just
appealing to his emotions, politicians (and salespeople) would need to appeal
to his interests.

------
matstc
Cheekily, I would add:

* Structure your argument to fit the topic. There is very little chance that there are exactly 10 reasons for doing anything.

------
wheels
This is more like a list of ways to be a swell guy than ways to be
intellectually honest. I know lots of brilliant assholes whom this wouldn't
fit for.

~~~
yters
Yeah, I don't know why being intellectually honest means one's ideas are
accessible to everyone or implies the admission that there are other equally
valid ideas.

Emphasizing this seems more a recipe for intellectual tepidity and vapidity
than honesty.

If someone is really sold on an idea, I think it is more effective if they
pursue it full heartedly. If someone else disagrees, it is up to them to
develop an effective counter argument.

Yes, if a whole area is of interest to me, then it is useful to investigate
all the relevant ideas. Otherwise, I don't see why this is important. It isn't
very efficient for everyone to address everything. There are just way too many
possible alternatives to consider all of them. As an analogy, we all know
software that packs everything but the kitchen sink isn't usually very good.
The Unix philosophy is special tools for special purposes.

For instance, I want very biased news sources, from multiple biases, instead
of all sources trying to cover all angles all the time. Leave it up to me to
sort out the overall picture, or just focus on one view if it seems to be the
most relevant.

------
kalid
I'm not sure if this is a list about intellectual honesty, but it's a good way
to see if someone is interested in finding the true answer to a question, vs.
being "right".

------
lsc
It is interesting how this reads like a "how to recognize a person who is bad
at marketing" list.

Really, I think as a customer, you get a much better deal if you place more
value on logic and honesty than on rhetoric, confidence, and the tall guy in
the nice suit.

------
anamax
11\. Never say that a fact supports your position if you're not willing to
change said position if said fact turns out to be something other than what
you thought originally. ("I like ponies because the sky is green." "The sky
isn't green." "I still like ponies.")

------
zby
The battle cry of the Perl community is TIMTOWTDI (There Is More Than One Way
To Do It). I've always been sceptical about it - sure there is more than one
way - but there must be one best way. Until I realized that this is not about
the technology - it is about having the mind open: "Show a willingness to
publicly acknowledge that reasonable alternative viewpoints exist" - indeed.

------
Tichy
Does intellectual honesty actually help in becoming popular? I am not sure
that it is the best way to "win" public discussions. For example, admitting
that I could be wrong (which I almost always do, due to my mathematical
training) always seems to backfire, creating an easy win for the opposition.

~~~
Prrometheus
Rhetoric and logic are separate disciplines. The first is about convincing
other people, the second is about seeking truth.

------
jacobscott
I think this is a pretty good list. I would add:

* Don't pander -- be careful about pushing emotional buttons

------
benbeltran
Hmm. Compare this article to the way presidential candidates behave.

Interesting.

------
thewordpainter
Listening is the most productive form of communication

------
stoic
This Account Has Exceeded Its CPU Quota

ouch

