Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Valuing intellectual honesty and DEI

Valuing intellectual honesty and DEI
Getty Images

Leland R. Beaumont is an independent wisdom researcher who is seeking real good. He is currently developing the Applied Wisdom curriculum on Wikiversity.

Diversity, equity, and inclusion, usually abbreviated as DEI, refers to efforts to promote the fair treatment and full participation of all people, particularly groups who have historically been underrepresented or subject to discrimination on the basis of identity or disability. These three notions (diversity, equity, and inclusion) together represent three closely linked values which organizations seek to institutionalize through DEI frameworks.


This is the right thing to do, especially considering historic inequalities. There are, however, circumstances where it is justified to exclude people or their incessant protests. It is often wise to exclude dishonest and disruptive dissent from deliberations and decisions. It is wise to expect intellectual honesty.

Intellectual honesty is the practice of accurately communicating true beliefs. True beliefs correspond to reality. True beliefs are accurate representations of matters of fact, as best they can be known.

What, if any, obligation do we have to include intellectually dishonest people in our conversations, on our influential platforms, and in our decision-making processes. Let’s consider some examples.

Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election, a free and fair election. This is a matter of fact, not a matter of opinion or of controversy. There is overwhelming evidence supporting this factual conclusion. For example, the 2020 presidential election was described by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) as "the most secure in American history," noting "[t]here is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised." Many claims of purported voter fraud were discovered to be false or misleading. Attorneys who brought accusations of voting fraud or irregularities before judges could not produce actual evidence to support the allegations.

After the 2020 United States presidential election, the campaign for incumbent President Donald Trump and others filed and lost 62 lawsuits contesting election processes, vote counting, and the vote certification process in nine states and the District of Columbia. Among the judges who dismissed the lawsuits were some appointed by Trump himself.

The outcome of the 2020 presidential election is a matter of fact, not a matter of opinion or controversy. The dissenters had their days in court, and they lost. It is time to accept the fact the election was free and fair, and Joe Biden won.

People who claim the election was stolen are intellectually dishonest. They are communicating untrue beliefs; they are communicating information that contradicts matters of fact. This may be because they are misinformed, disinformed, charlatans, or bullies. In any case, they are advancing falsehoods and fostering civil unrest. Being wrong does not justify disruptive behavior or violence. Falsehoods have no privileged claim to any particular forum.

People who are being intellectually dishonest deserve our civility but do not merit our acquiescence, capitulation, or acceptance of their falsehoods.

Consider the age of the Earth as another example. The Earth formed, it is here, and it has an age. There is a fact of the matter. The age of Earth is estimated to be 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years. This dating is based on evidence from radiometric age-dating of meteorite material and is consistent with the radiometric ages of the oldest-known terrestrial material and lunar samples.

This estimate of the age of the Earth is a matter of fact, corroborated by substantial reliable evidence collected and carefully examined and evaluated. Various estimates of Earth’s age have been proposed, challenged, and carefully examined by many scientists over many years of study. Our understanding evolves, and the Earth’s age is now known with great confidence.

Despite overwhelming reliable evidence and scientific consensus, young Earth creationism holds as a central tenet that the Earth and its lifeforms were created by supernatural acts of the Abrahamic God between approximately 6,000 and 10,000 years ago. Its primary adherents are Christians and Jews who believe that God created the Earth in six literal days. A 2017 Gallup creationism survey found that 38 percent of adults in the United States held the view that "God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years" when asked for their views on the origin and development of human beings.

While the First Amendment protects the free exercise of religion, we also have a moral obligation to seek true beliefs. Although tolerance is essential in the realm of opinion, it has no place in the realm of fact. Don’t be misled, know how you know so you can choose true beliefs and reject falsehoods.

Practicing dialogue with those holding dissenting views can provide valuable insights into their experiences, way of knowing, and motivations. These insights can help us come together.

Intellectual honesty and inclusion are the yin and yang of civil society. Reality is our common ground, and inclusion is our moral imperative. We can value both of these vital concepts simultaneously as we find common ground.


Read More

Chicago’s First Environmental Justice Ordinance Faces Uncertain Future in City Council

David Architectural Metals, Inc. is a longtime Chicago metal fabrication company for commercial and industrial construction. The company is situated in the same area as the other sites.

Chicago’s First Environmental Justice Ordinance Faces Uncertain Future in City Council

CHICAGO— Chicago’s first environmental justice ordinance sits dormant in the City Council’s Zoning Committee. Awaiting further action, some activists and alders have been pushing to get it passed, while others don’t want it passed at all.

At a Nov. 3 rare special committee meeting, Ald. Bennett Lawson (44th Ward), chair of the City Council’s Zoning Committee, said he would not call for a vote on the ordinance. His decision signaled the measure may lack enough support to advance, but its sponsors think there is enough community support to push it forward.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats' Affordability Campaign Should Focus on Frozen Wages
fan of 100 U.S. dollar banknotes

Democrats' Affordability Campaign Should Focus on Frozen Wages

Affordability has become a political issue because the cost of basic necessities - food, health and child care, transportation, and housing - for 43% of families today outruns their wages.

Inflation is one factor. But the affordability issue exists primarily because inflation-adjusted (real) wages for 80% of working- and middle-class men and women have been essentially frozen for the past 46 years.

Keep ReadingShow less
Silence, Signals, and the Unfinished Story of the Abandoned Disability Rule

Waiting for the Door to Open: Advocates and older workers are left in limbo as the administration’s decision to abandon a harsh disability rule exists only in private assurances, not public record.

AI-created animation

Silence, Signals, and the Unfinished Story of the Abandoned Disability Rule

We reported in the Fulcrum on November 30th that in early November, disability advocates walked out of the West Wing, believing they had secured a rare reversal from the Trump administration of an order that stripped disability benefits from more than 800,000 older manual laborers.

The public record has remained conspicuously quiet on the matter. No press release, no Federal Register notice, no formal statement from the White House or the Social Security Administration has confirmed what senior officials told Jason Turkish and his colleagues behind closed doors in November: that the administration would not move forward with a regulation that could have stripped disability benefits from more than 800,000 older manual laborers. According to a memo shared by an agency official and verified by multiple sources with knowledge of the discussions, an internal meeting in early November involved key SSA decision-makers outlining the administration's intent to halt the proposal. This memo, though not publicly released, is said to detail the political and social ramifications of proceeding with the regulation, highlighting its unpopularity among constituents who would be affected by the changes.

Keep ReadingShow less