The following selection is taken from Living in Truth, Beauty, and Goodness p. 49.
One model of the exercise of reason comes from Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274). When thinking about a particular subject, he took into consideration ideas from ancient and contemporary philosophers and from theologians of different religions. He organized his discussion of topics into a sequence of sharply focused questions. For each question, he created a short article, which began by listing the main objections that his historical and contemporary conversation partners could raise about the answer he was about to defend, and then set forth his own view in a brief, clear, reasoned way. Finally, he showed how to handle the previously stated objections.
If people could form the habit of using an abbreviated version of this procedure prior to entering a debate on a contentious issue, this could transform public discussion from polarized polemics into peaceful progress. It is essential to listen deeply to the perspectives of the groups involved. Fairness requires acknowledging that key premises in each group’s position may (perhaps crudely and partially) express a genuine value. In angry debate, opposing sides fail to acknowledge the values cherished by their opponents. True, sometimes a one-sided position finds the insight that slices through all the confusion and goes straight to the right conclusion. But a judicious examination of key ideas from all sides is a more reliable guide to reaching a sound conclusion. In a complex problem, truth cannot be told via one-sidedness; good judgment requires a sense of proportion.
Philosophical training in rational thinking does not ensure that our ideas will be correct, but it does help us spot some types of error. This is serious business, because thinking depends greatly on basic convictions; and in drawing conclusions, any one of us can make big mistakes based on one key premise that is seriously wrong.
Taking a couple of courses on formal logic and critical thinking (informal logic) would improve our ability to protect ourselves from sophistry and participate constructively in group discussion. The study of logic provides a vocabulary for identifying and explaining errors that occur when reasoning—our own or that of others—goes bad, and it helps organize our thoughts in a legitimately persuasive way. It is sad to contemplate the flood of shoddy thinking that pervades public media, which are overloaded with manipulative commercial and political messages. I sometimes entertain the idea that training in logic should be regarded as a requirement for responsible functioning as an adult. It should be widely known that philosophy can be taught at all levels, and that children can begin to develop logical thinking before being trained in formal logic. In France, for example, philosophy is part of secondary education. And one pioneering organization, the Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children, works with active Philosophy for Children centers in more than forty nations, serving preschoolers through high school students.
