Intellectual integrity

[Astrid]

I've mentioned intellectual integrity as an essential value in
science.
It is of course an ideal, and as such is imperfectly realized.
And dishonest people in all walks of life will do the opposite.

I'm suggesting here that it's a value all would do well to strive
for, and presenting this article as food for thought.

Scientific Integrity and the Ethics of 'Utter Honesty'

Honesty is a core scientific virtue, but what does it require of us?

thereader.mitpress.mit.edu

 

[AV1611VET]

I've mentioned intellectual integrity as an essential value in science.

Tell me about it:

Yes, it seems that even astronomers cannot have an election without messing around with the process. Such is sadly now the case as the vote in Prague by the International Astronomical Union to demote Pluto from planet to dwarf planet has been exposed as a fraud.

SOURCE

Scientists convicted of manslaughter for failing to warn of earthquake.

SOURCE

McDonald persistently cited three reasons for a delay: freezing overnight temperatures that could compromise the booster rocket joints; ice forming on the launchpad and spacecraft that could damage the orbiter heat tiles at launch; and a forecast of rough seas at the booster rocket recovery site.

SOURCE

'Wonder Drug' traces the dark history of thalidomide and the birth defects it caused.

SOURCE

And just for kicks:

List of Scientific Misconduct

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I've mentioned intellectual integrity as an essential value in
science.
It is of course an ideal, and as such is imperfectly realized.
And dishonest people in all walks of life will do the opposite.

I'm suggesting here that it's a value all would do well to strive
for, and presenting this article as food for thought.

Scientific Integrity and the Ethics of 'Utter Honesty'

Honesty is a core scientific virtue, but what does it require of us?

thereader.mitpress.mit.edu

We must also remember that humans are fallible and scientists are human.

There's also a difference between intentional and unintentional error, whether it's apparent or not - and that difference concerns integrity.

 

[Astrid]

We must also remember that humans are fallible and scientists are human.

There's also a difference between intentional and unintentional error, whether it's apparent or not - and that difference concerns integrity.

0f course! And very much to the point
of my posting it.

And hence the necessity of remembering,
reiterating that intellectual integrity is a highest
value in science!

The penalties for falsifying data are
quite harsh.

And the soaring achievements of good science can hardly be overstated, so in general the values are upheld.

Conversely, while pharmaceutical research
has done wonders, the incentive for dishonesty
is enough to produce disgraceful behaviour.

Unfortunately, the incentive to variously denigrate
deny, and falsify science in the name of religious beliefs
is far greater, irresistable- obviously- to vast swaths of
the populace- including scientists.

Such as the paleontologist who who said he'd still be
YEC if all data in the universe turned against yec- a statement that virtually defines scientific dishonesty.

Dishonesty brings shame to the perp.,and the
institution they represent be it a bank, lab, or religion.

I do wonder at so little evident effort to teach honesty
and ethics as essentials in religion.

Singling out YEC for its high visibility and constant
attacks on science, there may be sincerity, but i see
no honesty.

I so dontt get it why people can be like that.

It's my theory ( always open, eager for disproof) that it is
actually impossible to be a well educated yec, and maintain intellectual integrity.


If someone can explain it, show me there's an exception
I would be so interested to hear it

 

[Astrid]

We must also remember that humans are fallible and scientists are human.

There's also a difference between intentional and unintentional error, whether it's apparent or not - and that difference concerns integrity.

Unintentional error...we all do it.
Honest mistakes!
Honestly accept it, and move on.

Where we see willful ignorance, though, and refusal
to admit to any error...that's dishonest.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's my theory (always open, eager for disproof) that it is actually impossible to be a well educated yec, and maintain intellectual integrity.

In the secular world, the norms for intellectual integrity change often.

Intellectual integrity called Pluto our ninth planet for seventy-six years; until a rigged vote came along and changed that.

Now, today, anyone calling Pluto our ninth planet would be a violation of intellectual integrity (in most circles).

Intellectual integrity can barely keep up with today's ever-changing science.

And to call people out on it is ... well ... intellectually dishonest.

 

[AV1611VET]

Where we see willful ignorance, though, and refusal to admit to any error...that's dishonest.

To use your way of thinking:

It's impossible for any scientist today to be intellectually honest, unless he constantly keeps up with the newest fads.

If you want to stay intellectually honest, you'd better have subscriptions to every science magazine, periodical, and article that comes out; or you'll find yourself espousing something that went stale days ago.

 

[Neogaia777]

Bias or prejudice are the biggest enemies of intellectual honesty, and honesty in general, etc..

And maybe a very close second next after that is motivations like promoting yourself/exalting yourself (or your group) and fame and fortune or notoriety or motivations like money, etc.

Any of these can cause any kind of data to be off, and can completely distort the facts even to the point of sometimes being completely false/made-up sometimes, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Astrid]

Bias or prejudice are the biggest enemies of intellectual honesty, and honesty in general, etc..

And maybe a very close second next after that is motivations like promoting yourself/exalting yourself (or your group) and fame and fortune or notoriety or motivations like money, etc.

Any of these can cause any kind of data to be off, and can completely distort the facts even to the point of sometimes being completely false/made-up sometimes, etc.

God Bless.

Religious beliefs can be especially pernicious in this regard.
C an you identify any of your own religious bias that
interferes with intellectual integrity?

 

[AV1611VET]

Can you identify any of your own religious bias that interferes with intellectual integrity?

Miracles have a tendency to make us look intellectually dishonest in the eyes of the ignorant and/or denialists.

Am I intellectually dishonest because I believe Jesus rose from the grave?

 

[Neogaia777]

Religious beliefs can be especially pernicious in this regard.

I agree.

C an you identify any of your own religious bias that
interferes with intellectual integrity?

Yes, I can, and do, but I do try to do my best to compensate in this regard, because my being free of any kind of bias is very, very important to me.

Take Care/God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

Religious beliefs can be especially pernicious in this regard.
C an you identify any of your own religious bias that
interferes with intellectual integrity?

Do you think you have any kind of biases that make you not believe in God or Jesus or the Bible specifically?

 

[Astrid]

Do you think you have any kind of biases that make you not believe in God or Jesus or the Bible specifically?

Where I grew up, Christianity is an alien minority
religion.
I was raised atheist though we observed certain
Buddhist rituals and ways of thought. As well
as from other religions including christmas.

I had no interest in or feelings about Chrictian
ideas. My 5+ yrs in the USA was introduction to
Christians.
Not to go into lengthy details, but I was unimpressed.

We teach the same things about morality and ethics,and
more besides, and it's just part of life, no preacher, no
church needed.

The founding documents, starting with Genesis
are an odd mix of nonsense, obscurantism, pointless
recitation, folk,wisdom, advice good and bad, semi
historical accounts with a lot of magic realism.

Many of the actions or instructions of " god"
are horrific.

I could go on... but as a holy book from a god of
perfect goodness...no.
It's not like I didn't read the book.


Those who read it as believers have next to no chance of seeing it without profound, usually unshakeable bias.

It's a highest virtue to just have faith that its all true somehow no matter what.

I was taught to question everything...and keep what proves good and true.
For me the bible is a near total flop in that regard.

Questioning like that is discouraged in church.

And don't forget going to hell if you do dare!

Objectivity has no role there.

 

[Astrid]

I agree.

Yes, I can, and do, but I do try to do my best to compensate in this regard, because my being free of any kind of bias is very, very important to me.

Take Care/God Bless.

I forget...does that mean you recognize that there was no
"Flood"?

 

[AV1611VET]

Where I grew up, Christianity is an alien minority religion.

We call those places "mission fields."

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Where I grew up, Christianity is an alien minority
religion.
I was raised atheist though we observed certain
Buddhist rituals and ways of thought. As well
as from other religions including christmas.

I had no interest in or feelings about Chrictian
ideas. My 5+ yrs in the USA was introduction to
Christians.
Not to go into lengthy details, but I was unimpressed.

We teach the same things about morality and ethics,and
more besides, and it's just part of life, no preacher, no
church needed.

The founding documents, starting with Genesis
are an odd mix of nonsense, obscurantism, pointless
recitation, folk,wisdom, advice good and bad, semi
historical accounts with a lot of magic realism.

Many of the actions or instructions of " god"
are horrific.

I could go on... but as a holy book from a god of
perfect goodness...no.
It's not like I didn't read the book.


Those who read it as believers have next to no chance of seeing it without profound, usually unshakeable bias.

It's a highest virtue to just have faith that its all true somehow no matter what.

I was taught to question everything...and keep what proves good and true.
For me the bible is a near total flop in that regard.

Questioning like that is discouraged in church.

And don't forget going to hell if you do dare!

Objectivity has no role there.

I'm a "believer," so does this mean that I must be apportioned some amount of bias toward the Bible regardless of why and how I explain my belief? Must I be automatically assigned an amount of a lack of integrity because I value the Bible?

No, unfortunately, to make this sort of accusation is to dance within the fences of Philosophy, showing the bias that one already has against the Bible because he (or she) is willing to assume that anyone and everyone who "believes" in the Bible in some measure must be anti-intellectual and uneducated.

 

[Astrid]

I'm a "believer," so does this mean that I must be apportioned some amount of bias toward the Bible regardless of why and how I explain my belief? Must I be automatically assigned an amount of a lack of integrity because I value the Bible?

No, unfortunately, to make this sort of accusation is to dance within the fences of Philosophy, showing the bias that one already has against the Bible because he (or she) is willing to assume that anyone and everyone who "believes" in the Bible in some measure must be anti-intellectual and uneducated.

Tosh.

I value the bible too. I've no " bias against it".

I reject many of the things individuals claim about it.
As do you.

You value it. Great. So do I.
But in what way doest thou value it?
More highly and better, with more reason
and truth than i?

But that's not even the topic.

To answer your questions of P.1, no and no.

Also-
I've made no accusation. You tho, are accusing
me, giving your own ( wrong) answers to you ownr rhetorical "questions". And falsely telling me what
I assume- you here assuming the role of mind reader.

A not so bad way to learn is to ask. Try it.
Beats assumig, and making up an answer.

And by way of example, i ask, what,do YOU mean
by "believes"? Or "value"

Every single one of you Christians seems to
believe different things So don't lump all
believers in a way i'd not dream of doing.

I know what I mean when I say I believe the bible.
What do you mean?

Every single word is literally true?

What a person believes, and why is the whole
point of bringing up intellectual integrity.

Let's see how you stack up.

 

[Astrid]

I'm a "believer," so does this mean that I must be everyone who "believes" in the Bible in some measure must be anti-intellectual and uneducated.

Oh, and if you could, please, don't get all metaphorical?

I'm just an ESL student and have no idea what it
is to " dance within the fences of Philosophy".

 

[Neogaia777]

Where I grew up, Christianity is an alien minority
religion.
I was raised atheist though we observed certain
Buddhist rituals and ways of thought. As well
as from other religions including christmas.

I had no interest in or feelings about Chrictian
ideas. My 5+ yrs in the USA was introduction to
Christians.
Not to go into lengthy details, but I was unimpressed.

We teach the same things about morality and ethics,and
more besides, and it's just part of life, no preacher, no
church needed.

The founding documents, starting with Genesis
are an odd mix of nonsense, obscurantism, pointless
recitation, folk,wisdom, advice good and bad, semi
historical accounts with a lot of magic realism.

Many of the actions or instructions of " god"
are horrific.

I could go on... but as a holy book from a god of
perfect goodness...no.
It's not like I didn't read the book.


Those who read it as believers have next to no chance of seeing it without profound, usually unshakeable bias.

It's a highest virtue to just have faith that its all true somehow no matter what.

I was taught to question everything...and keep what proves good and true.
For me the bible is a near total flop in that regard.

Questioning like that is discouraged in church.

And don't forget going to hell if you do dare!

Objectivity has no role there.

I've always, well, at least I have been more recently at least, proceeding with premise that if the Bible is telling a real true story about a real true God, or a Trinity of God's, then how can it still be true, and have been proceeding from there, etc, and have been trying to be as objective as possible from there, but along those lines, etc, and I think I have had more than a few breakthroughs there, or in those areas, etc.

Would you like me to tell you about some of them?

Many of them differ very much greatly from what most Christians will let themselves believe, or the Christian norm, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

I forget...does that mean you recognize that there was no
"Flood"?

My views on how that all could still be possible are here:

Exodus evidence (part 2 updated)

Can you explain in detail where, in the Levant area, they invented clay pots and kept them in cisterns and made alcohol, and about when in BC? Was some of this alcohol also used as medicine? What were all the uses for alcohol back then? Were there agricultural methods used to make alcohol? How...

www.christianforums.com

God Bless.