| Revision as of 08:50, 2 September 2010 editSon of Somebody (talk | contribs)1,345 edits removing unexplained link← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:58, 2 September 2010 edit undoSon of Somebody (talk | contribs)1,345 edits removing a dead link & a link which doesn't support a definitionNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{TOCright}} | |||
| {{Refimprove|date=January 2010}} | |||
| {{TOC right}} | |||
| '''Intellectual dishonesty''' is ] in performing intellectual activities like thought or communication. Examples are: | '''Intellectual dishonesty''' is ] in performing intellectual activities like thought or communication. Examples are: | ||
| * the advocacy of a position which the advocate knows or believes to be false or misleading | * the advocacy of a position which the advocate knows or believes to be false or misleading | ||
| * the advocacy of a position which the advocate does not know to be true, and has not performed rigorous due diligence to ensure the truthfulness of the position | |||
| * the conscious omission of aspects of the truth known or believed to be relevant in the particular context. | * the conscious omission of aspects of the truth known or believed to be relevant in the particular context. | ||
| ] |
] is used to advance an ] or to reinforce one's deeply held ]s in the face of overwhelming contrary ].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00804199459/|title=Intellectual dishonesty (in philosophy)|date=2008-07-01|publisher=Enlexica, Inc.|accessdate=2008-07-16}}</ref> 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. If the person is knowingly aware that there may be additional evidence but purposefully fails to check, and then acts as though the position is confirmed, this is also intellectual dishonesty. | ||
| 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. | 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. | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| == See also == | == See also == | ||
| {{ |
{{Col-begin}} | ||
| {{Col-1-of-2}} | |||
| === In specific fields === | === In specific fields === | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| {{ |
{{Col-2-of-2}} | ||
| === Other === | === Other === | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| * ] | * ] | ||
| ⚫ | {{col-end}} | ||
| * ] | |||
| ⚫ | {{ |
||
| ==Footnotes== | ==Footnotes== | ||
| <references/> | <references/> | ||
| ==References== | |||
| *Colin McNickle, , December 15, 2002, The Pittsburg Tribune Review | |||
| *Editorial, , Jerusalem Post, May 20, 2006 | |||
| ] | ] | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| ] | |||
| {{philo-stub}} | {{philo-stub}} | ||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 08:58, 2 September 2010
Intellectual dishonesty is dishonesty in performing intellectual activities like thought or communication. Examples are:
- the advocacy of a position which the advocate knows or believes to be false or misleading
- the advocacy of a position which the advocate does not know to be true, and has not performed rigorous due diligence to ensure the truthfulness of the position
- the conscious omission of aspects of the truth known or believed to be relevant in the particular context.
Rhetoric is used to advance an agenda or to reinforce one's deeply held beliefs in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence. 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 ignorance, even if in agreement with the scientific conclusion. If the person is knowingly aware that there may be additional evidence but purposefully fails to check, and then acts as though the position is confirmed, this is also intellectual dishonesty.
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.
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 morality or policy.
See also
In specific fields |
Other
|
Footnotes
- "Intellectual dishonesty (in philosophy)". Enlexica, Inc. 2008-07-01. Retrieved 2008-07-16.
 | This philosophy-related article is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it. |