Intellectual Integrity

It's not rare that I start a book and don't finish it. That happens frequently, actually. I'll take five books out of the library and only finish two. Or the academic writing is above my head, which usually happens with math or physics, when I try to stretch myself, like a frozen rubber band. But it isn't often I will put down a book simply because I disagree with it's purpose; I believe one must understand the other side's argument in order to defend against it.

However, when the book blatantly disregards intellectual integrity to uphold its position, I cannot continue.

In a Psychology Today article from 2016, Gregg Henriques, Ph. D., writes, "Intellectual integrity involves both seeking and valuing the truth; being systematically critical of truth claims via analyzing assumptions and looking for evidence; being true to one’s intellectual understanding of the world; and being willing to change that understanding in light of new information. The institution of science epitomizes the values of intellectual integrity." [emphasis mine] He goes on to point out that our modern world of easy uploads and .coms makes it hard to identify truth.

But as Douglas Hunter's The Place of Stone: Dighton Rock and the Erasure of America's Indigenous Past proves, it isn't any easier to find in the old-fashioned printed word. In trying to prove white patriarchal society has intentionally obliterated the culture of the indigenous peoples of, specifically, New England, Hunter reverts to the very same lack of intellectual integrity he accuses his subjects of employing.

Early in the book, I realized I was not likely to agree with Hunter's premise. I don't believe every white American today should pay a penalty for lies and evils the early colonizers professed. But I pushed on, believing we should listen to the opposition's beliefs.

In chapter 6, Hunter explains Rafn's work (a Dutch historian in the early 1800s who never set foot in America) tries to prove a Norse discovery of America before Columbus. Rafn believed the Vineland Sagas of the Vikings prove they traveled as far south as Narragansett Bay and it was the Norse who carved into Dighton Rock. He supported his claims by explaining certain Pequot words sound like Norse words.

Rafn actually made a decent case for himself, although I'm not sure I believe it.

My problem with Hunter is that he fills pages with complaints about Rafn's lack of reputable scholarship, which may be true, but never once did Hunter tell me what those Pequot words actually mean. If you tell me Rafn is wrong in claiming "sett" is Old Norse for marshy place, then tell me what "sett" actually means! Prove he's wrong. Worse still, Hunter claims one of Rafn's American contemporaries died without addressing the questions in letters Rafn wrote to him because he was so shocked with Rafn's poor scholarship.

Balderdash! Hunter has no right to make such an unfounded claim.

It was at this point that I stopped reading.

But the past two weeks of slow plodding through this work were not wasted. It has kindled in me a desire to learn more about the Vikings and possible westward voyages. I also want to learn more about the indigenous tribes of the Eastern US. I hope to find works of greater intellectual integrity.