Benne says that "it is what is held to be true and valuable that is most important, not how it is held." I beg to differ.
I currently have a graduate class with a fundamentalist professor who can only make his points using straw men, poisoning the wells ad hominem. He acknowledged that he made most of his points based on straw men and that this was OK since he was biased and liked it that way.
What kind of results can such a defective process yield? My view is that part of graduate study is learning how to detect, reject and replace defective models. It does matter how truth is derived, for 2 plus 2 does not equal 5 no matter how many rats they shove in your face.