Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

  RoG> ... I do not think this is a question of
  RoG> "intellectual integrity," and labelling it
  RoG> as such is unhelpful.

  StC0> I think it's quite helpful. Having to hedge
  StC0> myself against prejudice and sloppy thinking
  StC0> isn't helping me as much as spending time
  StC0> actually having substantive discussion.
I'm not debating or questioning the use of a labal to capture the concept. I'm suggesting that the sepcific label you are using is itself a barrier to communication. To speak of someone failing to exhibit "intellectual integrity" feels like you are accusing them of dishonesty. I don't think, in truth, that you are doing so, but that is how it might appear.

You could consider a better label for the near inhuman, almost Vulcan, ability to put asides one's own opinions and beliefs in order to listen to the points being made by someone else. Calling it ""intellectual integrity" is, I think, conveying the wrong message, and caries too much baggage.

And yes, I suspect we are more in agreement than not. I, perhaps, am giving more leeway to those who are not trained to set aside their natural tendencies. It's something I've had to learn, at times painfully, upon entering a business environment after doing research in pure math. It seems to be a requirement, and simply one of those things one has to do in order to communicate effectively with people from the "Real World."

Sad, but true. I've had to learn to live with it.



Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: