Intellectual dishonesty - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ed Poor (talk | contribs) at 02:40, 19 January 2008 (advocacy of a position which the advocate knows to be false). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 02:40, 19 January 2008 by Ed Poor (talk | contribs) (advocacy of a position which the advocate knows to be false)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This article does not cite any sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Find sources: "Intellectual dishonesty" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (January 2007) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Intellectual dishonesty is the advocacy of a position which the advocate knows to be false. 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.

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 obfuscatory 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 audient 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