Zone1 Intellectual Honesty

[mamooth]

ZONE 1 everybody so keep it civil:

No problem.

From my observations over the last 20 years, you're stating the exact opposite of reality. While the left is occasionally dishonest, the right, the GOP and and the almost-entirely-conservative-MSM make dishonesty a constant habit.

That is, on the whole, the left is intellectually honest, the right is intellectually dishonest.

See: Trump. Lies about literally everything. Never admits to it. And almost all of his followers here constantly run cover for that, knowingly. The left on this board tends to be intellectually honest, the right tends to be intellectually dishonest.

Also, if you just wanted to discuss whether people can admit they were wrong, you didn't need start off by getting digs in on Democrats. Since you deliberately made it a partisan thread, it's okay for me to be just as partisan.

 

[Kilroy2]

Different thesis. Different topic. This thread is re intellectual dishonesty or defending what you KNOW is error.

The error was believing that the earth is flat because you are looking out the door.

 

[Foxfyre]

No problem.

From my observations over the last 20 years, you're stating the exact opposite of reality. While the left is occasionally dishonest, the right, the GOP and and the almost-entirely-conservative-MSM make dishonesty a constant habit.

That is, on the whole, the left is intellectually honest, the right is intellectually dishonest.

See: Trump. Lies about literally everything. Never admits to it. And almost all of his followers here constantly run cover for that, knowingly. The left on this board tends to be intellectually honest, the right tends to be intellectually dishonest.

Also, if you just wanted to discuss whether people can admit they were wrong, you didn't need start off by getting digs in on Democrats. Since you deliberately made it a partisan thread, it's okay for me to be just as partisan.

Since I didn't even mention Democrats in the OP, this post can be seen as intellectually dishonest from the get go. Or maybe just intellectually missing as the OP is not about whether people can admit they are wrong.

But do have a lovely evening.

The error was believing that the earth is flat because you are looking out the door.

It doesn't matter. What a person believes is what a person believes. It is not intellectually dishonest to believe something that has no basis in fact when you believe it is true.

What makes it intellectually dishonest is to defend/promote/broadcast what you know is not true.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

But when we don't know for sure what actually happened, the intellectually honest position is "I don't know."

I appreciate your intent, I have instances where I may have a hunch and an opinion but at the end of the day say there's no way to know.

Take the 2020 election for example:
1. Was it "stolen"? Possibly, but that's a gigantic claim. There's certainly odd occurrences that happened in this election, like a weird 15+ million uptick in Democrat voters for this one election, and major weird 3am downloads that went like 98% Democrat, and statistical near-impossibilities that happened in certain pivotal counties in Michigan and Pennsylviania.. along with other documented instances of polling places covering their windows and doing other shady things. At the end of the day, I say I cannot say it was stolen, even though I say it looks very shady.

2. Was it "rigged"? Absolutely. The MSM held Biden's water, as an institution systemically slammed the populace with Democrat propaganda that included proven falsehoods like the Russia Collusion Hoax, the Steele Dossier (that was paid disinformation by the DNC). Meanwhile, the deep state in the intelligence agency attacked the legitimacy of a true story that was the Hunter Biden Laptop, and DNC/Social media orchestrated the censoring of any mentions of it. They also outright censored and deleted a sitting presidents account on their platform.

So words can matter. The 2020 election was corrupt. It wasn't stolen, but you had the DNC, the Mainstream Legacy media, and intelligence agencies, and the gigantic big tech companies all working in unison to support the Democrats and harm Trump and the Republicans. It was a systemic corruption, clear as day.

 

[Kilroy2]

Since I didn't even mention Democrats in the OP, this post can be seen as intellectually dishonest from the get go. Or maybe just intellectually missing as the OP is not about whether people can admit they are wrong.

But do have a lovely evening.

It doesn't matter. What a person believes is what a person believes. It is not intellectually dishonest to believe something that has no basis in fact when you believe it is true.

What makes it intellectually dishonest is to defend/promote/broadcast what you know is not true.

You missed the definition

Intellectual honesty is an applied method of problem solving characterized by a nonpartisan and honest attitude,

The key word is problem solving not what one wants to belief because they were told so or have an agenda that they want to push .

It starts with an open mind and not looking to justify what one wants to believe. .

 

[candycorn]

No problem.

From my observations over the last 20 years, you're stating the exact opposite of reality. While the left is occasionally dishonest, the right, the GOP and and the almost-entirely-conservative-MSM make dishonesty a constant habit.

That is, on the whole, the left is intellectually honest, the right is intellectually dishonest.

See: Trump. Lies about literally everything. Never admits to it. And almost all of his followers here constantly run cover for that, knowingly. The left on this board tends to be intellectually honest, the right tends to be intellectually dishonest.

Also, if you just wanted to discuss whether people can admit they were wrong, you didn't need start off by getting digs in on Democrats. Since you deliberately made it a partisan thread, it's okay for me to be just as partisan.

Very well put.

The face of their party can’t open his mouth without lying, nearly everyone who voted for him has to endorse dishonest thing he says. They’ve become really good at changing the subject.

For example, Why is WalMart being told to “eat” the price increases (caused by tariffs) by Trump...Trump said that the exporters pay tariffs?

If you were to ask the OP this question (actually I just did), the answer would have nothing to do with admitting Trump lied... They can’t be honest.

 

[alang1216]

No Republican in this state would dare do that because they would be reported and probably at least investigated. The administrator of the rehab facility had an Obama/Biden bumper sticker on his car.

But can I say I knew either individual? No.

But we did witness Democrats at a local new citizen swearing in ceremony at the Convention Center going to the new citizens to register them to vote and telling them to be sure to mark the DEMOCRAT box which was blatantly illegal for them to do.

Interesting anecdotes, thanks. Do you think any of these misdeeds would have changed any Federal, State, or local election outcomes?

 

[mamooth]

Since I didn't even mention Democrats in the OP, this post can be seen as intellectually dishonest from the get go.

You did say "the left". It's intellectually dishonest of you to pretend you weren't talking about Democrats.

this post can be seen as intellectually dishonest from the get go. Or maybe just intellectually missing as the OP is not about whether people can admit they are wrong.

Then why even bring up "the left" and all their terrible crimes? If you were being intellectually honest, you wouldn't have done that. And you would have offered some examples of the left being intellectually dishonest, instead of just asserting it and demanding that everyone agree.

Let's keep on discussing the subject of your thread. I'll be specific, instead of speaking in unsupported generalities. I'll start with one example, the mental state of presidents.

Those on the left will say that we were misled about Biden's mental state, and admit that we were wrong. Intellectual honesty.

But we'll also point out that the right wildly exaggerated the severity of his condition. And we'll point out that Trump's mental state was and is far worse. And that Trump's condition is being covered up by the GOP and the MSM, and every rightie knowingly goes along with the deception.

So, if you look at this issue, the left is intellectually honest, while the right is intellectually dishonest. That's always the pattern.

I could go down the list with more such issues, where the left is honest and the right is not, but let's stick with this one for now. Is there any rightie out there who has the integrity to admit that Trump is badly mentally addled, and that they were wrong in the past to say otherwise? Or will they all knowingly keep saying things that they know aren't true, the definition of intellectual dishonesty?

 

[Foxfyre]

Interesting anecdotes, thanks. Do you think any of these misdeeds would have changed any Federal, State, or local election outcomes?

In some places it is always a possibility. Mostly related to local elections here, it is amazing how many times in a razor thin margin, an 'overlooked' ballot box is found with just enough votes to give the Democrat the win. No way to prove any wrong doing, but a person utilizing intellectual honesty has to at least raise an eyebrow when that happens most especially when it has never given the Republican the win. And given that our state has never had a Republican majority legislature in the 113 years that it has been a state.

In other words it is not intellectually honest to pretend that election fraud is okay because it doesn't really matter. If it didn't really matter it wouldn't be happening.

On the other hand, those of us who acknowledge that there is insufficient proof that fraud changed the outcome of the 2020 election would be intellectually dishonest if we said we are sure that it did.

But given how much evidence was compromised or destroyed before a complete investigation could be done, it can be quite intellectually honest to say that it is possible.

It can be quite intellectually honest to believe that systems and processes should be corrected to give American voters assurance that their vote will be counted, it will be counted in the way they voted, and nobody but properly registered citizens vote.

All who oppose that as unnecessary in my opinion are not being intellectually honest. In my opinion they want their side to be able to cheat to win.

 

[Foxfyre]

You did say "the left". It's intellectually dishonest of you to pretend you weren't talking about Democrats.



Then why even bring up "the left" and all their terrible crimes? If you were being intellectually honest, you wouldn't have done that. And you would have offered some examples of the left being intellectually dishonest, instead of just asserting it and demanding that everyone agree.

Let's keep on discussing the subject of your thread. I'll be specific, instead of speaking in unsupported generalities. I'll start with one example, the mental state of presidents.

Those on the left will say that we were misled about Biden's mental state, and admit that we were wrong. Intellectual honesty.

But we'll also point out that the right wildly exaggerated the severity of his condition. And we'll point out that Trump's mental state was and is far worse. And that Trump's condition is being covered up by the GOP and the MSM, and every rightie knowingly goes along with the deception.

So, if you look at this issue, the left is intellectually honest, while the right is intellectually dishonest. That's always the pattern.

I could go down the list with more such issues, where the left is honest and the right is not, but let's stick with this one for now. Is there any rightie out there who has the integrity to admit that Trump is badly mentally addled, and that they were wrong in the past to say otherwise? Or will they all knowingly keep saying things that they know aren't true, the definition of intellectual dishonesty?

Just one example from your post. Give your evidence that Trump is 'badly mentally addled' or admit that you are not being intellectually honest about that but are just saying words to discredit him.

 

[80zephyr]

No problem.

From my observations over the last 20 years, you're stating the exact opposite of reality. While the left is occasionally dishonest, the right, the GOP and and the almost-entirely-conservative-MSM make dishonesty a constant habit.

That is, on the whole, the left is intellectually honest, the right is intellectually dishonest.

See: Trump. Lies about literally everything. Never admits to it. And almost all of his followers here constantly run cover for that, knowingly. The left on this board tends to be intellectually honest, the right tends to be intellectually dishonest.

Also, if you just wanted to discuss whether people can admit they were wrong, you didn't need start off by getting digs in on Democrats. Since you deliberately made it a partisan thread, it's okay for me to be just as partisan.

If the left continues to tell us that a man can become a woman, I have zero faith in anything else they say.

 

[Foxfyre]

You missed the definition

Intellectual honesty is an applied method of problem solving characterized by a nonpartisan and honest attitude,

The key word is problem solving not what one wants to belief because they were told so or have an agenda that they want to push .

It starts with an open mind and not looking to justify what one wants to believe. .

I will stand by my definition.

Intellectual honesty can be applied in politics or in partisan issues but it certainly is not confined to that.

So the definition you pulled off the internet as the first thing Google showed you is incomplete and probably intellectually dishonest in itself implying that it only applies to problem solving with the implication that partisanship is a factor in it.

Maybe the person who wrote that believed it and was not being intellectually dishonest. But few Google or 'woke' inspired definitions are really accurate these days.

 

[Foxfyre]

I appreciate your intent, I have instances where I may have a hunch and an opinion but at the end of the day say there's no way to know.

Take the 2020 election for example:
1. Was it "stolen"? Possibly, but that's a gigantic claim. There's certainly odd occurrences that happened in this election, like a weird 15+ million uptick in Democrat voters for this one election, and major weird 3am downloads that went like 98% Democrat, and statistical near-impossibilities that happened in certain pivotal counties in Michigan and Pennsylviania.. along with other documented instances of polling places covering their windows and doing other shady things. At the end of the day, I say I cannot say it was stolen, even though I say it looks very shady.

2. Was it "rigged"? Absolutely. The MSM held Biden's water, as an institution systemically slammed the populace with Democrat propaganda that included proven falsehoods like the Russia Collusion Hoax, the Steele Dossier (that was paid disinformation by the DNC). Meanwhile, the deep state in the intelligence agency attacked the legitimacy of a true story that was the Hunter Biden Laptop, and DNC/Social media orchestrated the censoring of any mentions of it. They also outright censored and deleted a sitting presidents account on their platform.

So words can matter. The 2020 election was corrupt. It wasn't stolen, but you had the DNC, the Mainstream Legacy media, and intelligence agencies, and the gigantic big tech companies all working in unison to support the Democrats and harm Trump and the Republicans. It was a systemic corruption, clear as day.

A very good intellectually honest analysis.

Is it intellectually honest to recognize the anomalies that could be identified as deliberate intent to steal the election? In my opinion yes it is.

Would it be intellectually honest to say I have all information necessary to prove that an election was stolen? In my opinion, no it would not.

Is it intellectually honest to believe that our system must be reformed/tightened up and fixed so that the anomalies we saw in 2020 can never happen again? So that the American people can be confident that only properly registered citizens can vote and only properly registered citizens do vote? So that each properly registered citizen can be reasonably certain his/her vote was counted and was counted as he/she voted? Yes it is.

Are those who say that isn't necessary, that everything is fine just as it is, being intellectually honest? That is always possible, but I wouldn't be intellectually honest if I didn't admit that I believe that the vast majority who resist reforms in the election process and procedures do so because they want their side to be able to cheat or want others to believe their side didn't cheat.

 

[alang1216]

In some places it is always a possibility. Mostly related to local elections here, it is amazing how many times in a razor thin margin, an 'overlooked' ballot box is found with just enough votes to give the Democrat the win. No way to prove any wrong doing, but a person utilizing intellectual honesty has to at least raise an eyebrow when that happens most especially when it has never given the Republican the win. And given that our state has never had a Republican majority legislature in the 113 years that it has been a state.

In other words it is not intellectually honest to pretend that election fraud is okay because it doesn't really matter. If it didn't really matter it wouldn't be happening.

On the other hand, those of us who acknowledge that there is insufficient proof that fraud changed the outcome of the 2020 election would be intellectually dishonest if we said we are sure that it did.

But given how much evidence was compromised or destroyed before a complete investigation could be done, it can be quite intellectually honest to say that it is possible.

It is quite intellectually honesty to believe that systems and processes should be corrected to give American voters assurance that their vote will be counted, it will be counted in the way they voted, and nobody but properly registered citizens vote.

All who oppose that as unnecessary in my opinion are not being intellectually honest. In my opinion they want their side to be able to cheat to win.

Almost anything is possible but making a claim for years that no investigations have been able to confirm is the poster boy for intellectual dishonesty.

 

[sartre play]

Having strong feelings about something does not make it the truth.
Trying to be as honest as possible, even while admitting that am not always right.
And a large amount of the time its just my PERSONAL opinion.

 

[Foxfyre]

Almost anything is possible but making a claim for years that no investigations have been able to confirm is the poster boy for intellectual dishonesty.

You cannot examine evidence that has been destroyed and/or was never provided or otherwise compromised. So it is not intellectually dishonest to wonder what the outcome would have been had everybody been 100% ethical and wanted the American voters to be confident the election was honest and on the up and up.

 

[candycorn]

You cannot examine evidence that has been destroyed and/or was never provided or otherwise compromised. So it is not intellectually dishonest to wonder what the outcome would have been had everybody been 100% ethical and wanted the American voters to be confident the election was honest and on the up and up.

Nothing was destroyed.

The 2020 election was the most closely watched, investigated election in history.

There were like 8,000 offices up for election on that day--city council slots, county offices, statewide offices, House, Senate and yes the presidential contest.

There were like 4 losers who claimed there was voter fraud. The rest took their loss like an adult.

This is a primary example of just how intellectually dishonest you’ve become. Its really quite sad.

 

[candycorn]

If the left continues to tell us that a man can become a woman, I have zero faith in anything else they say.

Without a quote, one has to assume you’re making that up.

 

[80zephyr]

Without a quote, one has to assume you’re making that up.

Are you actually telling me you have never heard that said?

 

[Foxfyre]

If the left continues to tell us that a man can become a woman, I have zero faith in anything else they say.

Putting that within the framework of the OP though, it is possible that some may actually believe that and are not being intellectually dishonest when they say so.

Remember that a person can be intellectually honest and also be wrong - or ignorant - or really REALLY stupid.

But those pushing a doctrine like that for propaganda/partisan purposes only are definitely being intellectually dishonest when they do so.