This is a special post for quick takes by 0blivion. Only they can create top-level comments. Comments here also appear on the Quick Takes page and All Posts page.
I will share criteria that I use in order to determine whether someone's writings are intellectually honest or not.
Firstly, intellectual honesty does NOT mean neutrality. It is perfectly possible to have a preferred position on a subject (it can be in the scientific minority or not, that doesn't matter) without being intellectually dishonest.
Here are the criteria.
1)Transparency. Do they hide that they have an agenda/preference or is it public knowledge? Do they hide behind scientific neutrality or do they openly admit that they are interpreting facts according to a philosophical/religious position?
2)The use of sophistry in their writings. Are their writings logically sound?
3)Are the categories they use clear? Is the language understandable or is it purposefully obscure?
4)Do they accurately represent the scientific opposition and answer to the real counter-arguments from the scientific opposition or do they tend to strawman their opposition?
5)Do they use force or threats in order to neutralize scientific opposition?
6)Is there a double-standards for what constitutes evidence? As an example requiring irrefutable proof for opposing positions but using shaky proof for their own position.
I am thinking about writing a series of essays for the sake of apologetics.
I need people who are interested in the topic of metaphysics and who would like to exchange with me in order to improve my essays before publishing them.
I was an atheist during most of my life, specifically a materialist and reductionist. First I discovered that God's existence was necessary for reality itself to exist. Then I investigated religions historically and philosophically in order to verify which ones can be obviously refuted and which ones remain as candidates to possibly being true.
Then it became clear that Christianity was the winner from the point of view of someone rationally investigating the truth of religion and admitting that religion is possible.
If there are people who are interested, I would like to see if there are mistakes that I have made during my quest towards Truth.