Steadfastly supportive of what you believe and always an advocate, or as consistent as possible in principle and risk weakening your devotion or other's belief in your devotness to the cause?
I would rather be the latter. This is what I call intellectually honesty. The willingness to believe in something but to also admit when an argument used to support it is wrong.
Your thoughts?
2006-09-03 05:59:03 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
*Intellectual
2006-09-03 06:06:02 · update #1
Second one, cause that's honest and reasonable.
2006-09-03 06:06:14 · answer #1 · answered by Pink Rose 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would rather think it through first, then support it steadfastly, but life changes, and so do people, so one must constantly be re-evaluating. However, a truth is a truth by any other name. The thing you want to be most honest about is not what you believe but why you believe it. Sometimes the argument may be faulty--people are, after all--but the belief may be sound. If you cannot earnestly examine all the pros and cons, and reason out why said proof seems faulty, or why you think it is, then you are not being intellectually honest.
Flux (which is what Ari Emory calls hormone-driven thought) often leaves intellectual considerations by the wayside, so if you don't know why you thought it, you don't understand what you're thinking. Ergo, you don't know right from wrong, true from false, and have no way of making a considered judgment.
2006-09-03 06:23:16 · answer #2 · answered by kaththea s 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you. I would rather be as consistent as possible in principle and be open to new facts or evidence. In some respects I would be steadfastly supportive of my principle belief that is "I don't know for sure" and pretty much everything is open to new information and evidence. Things change so quickly and it is frightening to face that fact. It is easier to stick to one set of beliefs no matter what.
2006-09-07 08:44:09 · answer #3 · answered by Siri 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't care for either option. I like the way I am now. Beliefs are perpetually growing as I learn and I don't feel they are set and really won't be until my end days.
I guess I am an advocate , but only for more people to read, not over who is right or wrong, I think that is up to individuals to do for themselves.
I live by my forethought I have gained so far and I prepare myself for eventualities. Every time I read I learn things that change my mind.
2006-09-06 21:11:25 · answer #4 · answered by spider 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Steadfastly supportive of what you believe & always an advocate. Even though I'm not that but it would be better than weak. Yet if I sin I would rather be a sinner than a false saint.
2006-09-03 06:07:46 · answer #5 · answered by bizzaro9 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A true human being is one who is ready to accept the truth in any condition. So I would rather choose to be the latter one.
2006-09-03 06:06:35 · answer #6 · answered by *RA* 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
intellectual honesty ?
I would be devoted to principal..but honestly, principles are relative .so ....
you can be principled...honest........or devoted..... being devoted doesn't mean you are intellectual or honest...
what do you think? great question
2006-09-08 19:37:33 · answer #7 · answered by cesare214 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I will be an advocate of what I believe until I am genuinely proved wrong.
2006-09-03 08:04:56 · answer #8 · answered by ashcatash 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Congratulations, you are!....but you are allowing yourself the element of change.....yes we all change....
would you rather be alive or dead.....that's what happens if you don't change...
Live and be happy by helping one more person today....
2006-09-08 03:14:58 · answer #9 · answered by May I help You? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the 1st, only because my belief is that of science. science is truth. science will change as fact is better undersood and so will i.
2006-09-03 06:22:37 · answer #10 · answered by jsjmlj 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋