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