Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site inmet.UUCP Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decvax!yale!inmet!janw From: janw@inmet.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Orphaned Response Message-ID: <7800599@inmet.UUCP> Date: Wed, 30-Oct-85 23:30:00 EST Article-I.D.: inmet.7800599 Posted: Wed Oct 30 23:30:00 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 2-Nov-85 08:35:04 EST References: <1025@bunker.UUCP> Lines: 26 Nf-ID: #R:bunker:-102500:inmet:7800599:177600:1075 Nf-From: inmet!janw Oct 30 23:30:00 1985 [Gary Samuelson : garys@bunker] > > >> "Scientific Creationism" cannot be taught honestly; but I'd > > > > Just in case anyone notices this : I meant "intellectual honesty", > > not intending at all to impugn sincerity or personal integrity of > > those who believe in it. --Jan Wasilewsky > > OK, if you say you do not intend to impugn sincerity or personal > integrity, I'll have to take your word for it. But in that case, > what do you mean by "intellectual honesty"? OK, what I mean by it (and I won't quarrel over definitions) is playing by certain rules of the intellectual game. Some people don't know the rules and some forget them when under the influence of a strong emotion. In both cases they may be quite sincere but their way of reasoning may lack intellectual honesty. One such rule is that evidence must be sifted on its own merits and not according to whether it supports what one already believes. Many well-meaning and sincere people forget this when their strongly held beliefs are in question. Perhaps we all do sometimes. Jan Wasilewsky