1. Consider the following cases. What do you think about each? What are the indicators that each person does not believe what he has reasoned out? What are the barriers to thinking critically in each case?
- Micheal reasons out the issue of capital punishment as deterrent. He gathers information and concludes that it does not significantly deter murder or other violent crimes. But after his investigation, he feels angry. He says, "Maybe that's true, but I'm still in favor of capital punishment because you have to do something to stop the criminals."
The argument of capital punishment is very difficult. You have to be strong minded and well educated on the topic to choose an argument. It is ignorant to say that all murderers should die. Micheal did his research and came to a realization that maybe capital punishment is extreme and hasn't really benefited the justice system, but still he will not change his on the topic. I think he became angry because he felt defeated, he wants criminal activity to decrease but he cannot think of any other positive solutions for the justice system.
- Maria is taking a course in gender studies, reasons her way through the argument that there is no nonsexist reason why a woman should adopt her husband's name at marriage. Like Micheal, Maria discovers that the more she follows the argument the angrier she gets.
Maria is getting angry because she knows her argument is not reasonable. Marriage is a tradition and adopting the groom last name is a part of that tradition; there are nonsexist reasons why a woman should adopt her husband's name. Traditionally a woman getting married means her family has given her away she has now left her own to join another family for this reason she should adopt the new family name. Other reasons are for insurance and financial reasons. Maria knew she was stretching her sexist argument and it was making her angry to admit to being wrong.
- Pete believes that all cultures and all cultural practices are equally valid. He believes people do not have a right to say that a particular culture's practices are wrong. But he also believes that it's part of our Western culture to impose our ideas on others, and that it's wrong for us to do that. (Most of us believe that everyone should be treated equally, but that does not prevent us from thinking we deserve special breaks.)
Pete is contradicting himself." He believes that all cultures and cultural practices are equally valid" but then he also believes that it is wrong for Western culture to impose ideas on others. It is a custom in Western culture to be the leader of all societies. If Pete believes that all cultural practices are equally valid then he should agree that it is fair for Western culture to impose on other cultures. If a person comes to the United States from another country are not necessarily expected to adapt our culture and became American overnight but we do have customs and laws that everyone should accept. Vice versa for Americans.
- Some people think that eating dogs, cats, or seagulls is revolting, but that eating cows or chickens is quite reasonable. They believe this despite the fact that all their reasoning's show the cases are identical. They find themselves trying to make up reasons that they know don't work ( such as "Dogs and cats are pets! That's why it is wrong to eat them.")
This scenario stood out to me the most because the cases are identical and the reasoning really comes to cultural aspect. Eating cat or dogs in Western culture is taboo but in other cultures it may be the normal. And if you are not familiar with eating cat or dog then you can't understand why it may be delicacy or dietary supplement for others. I personally wouldn't eat cat, dog or seagulls but I wouldn't judge another person if they did.
2. Consider the following situation. Explain why the last step is difficult?
The teacher lowered my course grade because I missed too many classes. I feel unfairly treated. So I raise the question: "Was my teacher being fair in giving me this grade?"
- Collect information:
- Check the syllabus about missed classes
- Ask the teacher
- Consider the teacher's point of view on the issue and purpose in lowering grades due to absences
- Conclusion: the teacher was fair
- Therefore, I believe the results of my reasoning that my teacher's actions in lowering my grade were fair.
- Why is this last step difficult?
- The last step is difficult because it is often challenging for some people to accept their faults. It may be difficult for a student to agree with the reasons that it is their negligence that caused the lowering of their grade received in the class. It is easier to blame others for our faults.
I think in each case the person comes to an understanding of the opposition to their argument but are still unwilling to agree or accept defeat. Each person in the scenarios seems biased based on their thinking. To have an educated opinion you must be subjective and understanding of both sides to an argument whether or not you agree or believe it.
