I have been thinking about this for a couple of days now and trying to figure out if I was right or wrong. Recently I was criticized for accusing another member of lying. In my opinion, I did not accuse the member of lying. My intent was to say that it was intellectually dishonest to not consider any argument other than the one the member had chosen to believe. My general definition of intellectual dishonesty is: Advocacy for or promotion of a position while intentionally omitting mitigating factors. Refusal to consider another point of view or verifiable facts while stubbornly defending one’s point of view. Extreme partisanship or ideological perspective that assigns positive or negative attributes to a person or group for no reason other than they do not agree. Accusing another of lying or being dishonest without any ability to defend the accusation. Repeating something as truth because you want it to be truth even after it has been shown that a belief is flawed or incorrect. The person does not intentionally lie and is therefore not a liar. In each case, a person believes or wants something to be a truth so strongly that he or she is unwilling to consider or accept anything that might compromise or weaken what he or she has adopted as truth. I’m sure others can think of other truths for the definition or some may have a good argument for why some bullet points should not be included. So what do you think? Is intellectual dishonesty the same thing as lying? Or is it something else?