Revision as of 19:44, 8 February 2008 editDante Alighieri (talk | contribs)Administrators9,819 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 00:05, 26 December 2011 edit undoViriditas (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers169,230 edits Redirect to sourced article | ||
(52 intermediate revisions by 35 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
#redirect ] | |||
{{Unreferenced|date=January 2007}} | |||
'''Intellectual dishonesty''' is the advocacy of a position which the advocate knows or believes to be false. ] is used to advance an ] or to reinforce one's deeply held ]s in the face of overwhelming contrary ]. If a person is aware of the evidence and agrees with the conclusion it portends, yet advocates a contradictory view, they commit intellectual dishonesty. If the person is unaware of the evidence, their position is ], even if in agreement with the scientific conclusion. | |||
The terms ''intellectually dishonest'' and ''intellectual dishonesty'' are often used as rhetorical devices in a debate; the label invariably frames an opponent in a negative light. It is an ] way to say "''you're lying''" or "''you're stupid''", and has a cooling effect on conversations similar to accusations of ignorance. | |||
The phrase is also frequently used by orators when a debate foe or audience reaches a conclusion varying from the speaker's on a given subject. This appears mostly in debates or discussions of speculative, non-scientific issues, such as ] or ]. | |||
== See also == | |||
* In specific fields: | |||
** ] | |||
** ] | |||
** ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
{{philo-stub}} |
Latest revision as of 00:05, 26 December 2011
Redirect to: