Thanks Jamie. I think you've offered an excellent, succinct, insightful framing of the issues. Love the Bukowski quote, which I've used as well. I'll just mention, consistent with your observations, that I've been engaged in the "search for truth" (like many of us here, I'm sure) all my life and, more narrowly, in my field of study. Speaking personally, I've long doubted my own understandings of most issues, always hoping to gather more evidence and weigh that in light of the epistemic foundations of the knowledge produced. It becomes difficult to arrive at definitive conclusions through such an open-ended process, which, of course, may be the point. But, what I will say is that the reason I've not written "books" until just now, in my mid-50s, is that I've felt like it has taken several decades to arrive at some fuller understanding about the issues I've studied intensely (and yet I still have my doubts and uncertainties). In short, one of your final comments brilliantly summarizes my own conclusion: "I've reached a state where my ideas are composed of ideas that require very long arguments or books to justify." That's exactly where I am - and that's why I'm only writing "books" now after about 40 years of thought, study, and research. But that's not to say that someone, indeed many people, far more insightful & intelligent than yours truly, couldn't produce books at much younger ages. Remarkable insights can come from anyone, anywhere, and at any age. They might just need a bit more time and experience to figure out how to justify and communicate their ideas effectively! Anyway, just wanted to say how much I deeply appreciate your observations. And now, off to our "new faculty orientation" for the remainder of the day - but just reading Gregg's blog, your comments, and thinking about these issues would be an excellent orientation exercise! All best regards, -Joe Dr. Joseph H. Michalski Associate Academic Dean King’s University College at Western University 266 Epworth Avenue London, Ontario, Canada N6A 2M3 Tel: (519) 433-3491 Fax: (519) 963-1263 Email: [log in to unmask] ______________________ eiđ + 1 = 0 ________________________________ From: tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Mathew Jamie Dunbaugh <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 8:24 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: The value of intellectual integrity In my understanding, Epistemic Virtues are the virtues that lead someone to knowledge or truth. Some epistemic virtues are curiosity, open-mindedness, a sensitivity to reason and evidence, doubt, but also experience and good judgment. Most importantly, in my opinion, is the humble openness, or even an almost masochistic eagerness, to change your mind in the face of good reasons and evidence. This can be very hostile to certain other needs in life such as community or emotional well-being, but anyone who wants the truth must think this way. Most people are bigots. It's very, very hard to avoid bigotry, perhaps even impossible. Arguing based on the presumed motives of your interlocutor seems like an epistemic vice. If you want you and your interlocutor to reach the truth, you have to go down the complicated rabbit hole of ideas. Unfortunately, it's often only practical between people of similar background, and similar background often maintains the biases between interlocutors. There is a sweet spot of different opinions and similar knowledge for the most fruitful conversations to take place. Judging the truth-value of a person's ideas based on their motives is a fallacy. Ideas are completely separate from their motives. In a previous email, I listed what I believe to be the conditions the truth must meet for us to be at peace with it. I'm mostly agnostic about whether or not the truth meets these conditions, but I tentatively believe it does. The evidence in cultural evolution, as well as the truth contained in good fiction give me confidence that the absolute truth might be totally satisfactory despite the vicissitudes of life. My claims about the conditions that must be met to reconcile one with the truth are gotten through introspection with a moderate degree of observations of human behavior. I'm completely open to the idea that complete reconciliation with the truth is impossible, but I think a degree of wisdom can be achieved that reveals a satisfactory understanding of reality. There are all sorts of complications in the above. I assume that there is such thing as an absolute truth and I assume it must meet certain conditions for humans to be at peace with it. I also claim there is such a thing as a problem of reconciliation with the truth. It's also very hard to justify the idea that good fiction and religion contain wisdom about human nature and patterns of human experience in cultural evolution. I've reached a state where my ideas are composed of ideas that require very long arguments or books to justify. It's often the case that intellectuals are regarded as arrogant. This is tragic considering that intellectual integrity requires a great deal of humility. A consequence is this: Charles Bukowski — 'The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.' Critical thinking follows the Dunning-Kruger effect, so intelligent people are only confident after a long period of learning: [image.png] On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 3:53 AM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: Hi List, I have been thinking quite a bit lately about the value of intellectual integrity. As I have blogged about before, (see, e.g., here We Need to Value Intellectual Integrity<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_blog_theory-2Dknowledge_201602_we-2Dneed-2Dvalue-2Dintellectual-2Dintegrity&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=GHqEZdNvno2zrf5nEZXvpJOcwu6emCpQTH2ci8NMKAA&s=BaOjUVeGX8RR6VkFgvoi5JVlKSlWElzk730MvIhPO3A&e=>) it is one of the values that I as being in most danger, especially on the political scene, but also more broadly. I would love to hear what others think. It seems to me that the desire for a Theory of Knowledge would go hand in glove with a value of intellectual integrity. Do we as a society deeply share this value? Best, Gregg ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:mailto:[log in to unmask]> or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1