Yeah, sure, I do in fact think it is virtuous to be aware that we don't always have complete information and that we should be willing to revise our opinions when new information is encountered. Is that controversial?
No, no, not controversial. I intended to make it easier to understand the point by demonstrating for the more literal-minded that using moral language sets up two halves of a dichotomy, one preferred to the other, so that such prejudices needn't be personal but rather merely moral. The difference is of course that which side of a moral dichotomy is a choice that can be reversed (e.g. making an effort to open the mind) while personal matters are immutable in those people.
