[Invincibly Ignorant]

I think if one wants to engage in apologetics and be taken seriously, he needs to be somewhat intellectually open.

Oh. I thought you meant anti-intelectual. The above insinuates intelectual dishonesty.

[SoothingDave]

I think if one wants to engage in apologetics and be taken seriously, he needs to be somewhat intellectually open.

Oh. I thought you meant anti-intelectual. The above insinuates intelectual dishonesty.

Intellectual dishonesty would involve something like making up bogus quotations from non-existant sources, or refuing to apply reasonable logic to given data, or refusing to accept commonly accepted data.

Anti-intellectualism is to simply refuse to entertain any information which might cause you to re-think your position. To rely solely upon one's own understanding of "Truth" and to be afraid to subject it to reason at all.

SD