52d, Posted for: Whole Community
Discussion group on the virtues inherent in robust critical thinking
Posted by: Michelle Causton
{"ops":[{"insert":"At some point we delved into ethics and its relation to critical thinking. From the discussion I learned this:\n\"The proper role of ethical reasoning is to highlight acts of two kinds: those that enhance the well-being of others—which warrant praise—and those that harm or diminish the well-being of others—and thus warrant criticism.\" \nI can not disagree with that. But I want to suggest that a true ethical dilemma is where there are two (or more) alternatives both of which will enhance the well being of others but you cannot do both. If neither is \"wrong\" how do you decide?\nFor example: A politician has to decide whether to increase spending on infrastructure which will enhance the life of many people - better, safer roads; facilitation of transportation. Of course if they do that there will be less money for education. Which weighs more? Both will enhance the well being of others. How do you decide which is more important. \nOr a simple example: Saving for a child's education is a selfless act which will enhance the child's well being in the future. If financial disaster befalls the family is it \"wrong\" to access the savings to keep a roof over your head?\nThese are the types of ethical questions I like to explore. \nIn these cases we can judge someone else's decision but it is more useful to think about how we would have made the decision. \nThanks to everyone for making me think deeply!\n\n"}]}
Posted by: Ken Stringer
{"ops":[{"insert":"Hello Michelle! I had forgotten an important work I used years ago professionally whose author I actually invited to present to a senior seminar of CIA managers: How Good People Make Tough Choices by Rushworth Kidder, Regrettably, he died in 2012 at the age of 67. He was the founder of the Institute for Global Ethics that aspparently continues out of Rockland, Maine. You may welll be familiar with his work and the Institute, but if not I highly recommend them to you as a very useful, insightful perspective on addressing and resolving the kind of ethical dilemmas you mention--which fit perfectly into his concept of \"right versus right\" questions--neither choice is \"wrong\" which makes them far more difficult to address. I think Dr. Kidder's approach closely parallels that of the critical thinker in that he counsels thinking through the \"competing\" values. In other words, if one has applied ethical reasoning conscientiously, it will serve to help make the choice--decided between two ethical rights. And, as you say, if we are to assess (judge) someone's else's decision, we have to think through how we would have made that decision. Thank YOU for jogging my memory on Rushworth Kidder and his seminal work.\n"}]}