Exercise4.1.5

PHI332 : The Class : Argument Evaluation : Objection & Replies : Exercise4.1.5

Exercise4.1.5: Objections to objections

Obviously, the more you practice raising objections, the better you will get at it. It may surprise you, however, to learn that your actions in raising objections develop your moral character as well as your powers of intellect. You want to monitor and seek to improve your personal character in all your human actions, including the action of arguing and inquiring in a research paper or discussion. In particular, you want to exercise and develop the human virtues of magnanimity, fidelity, benevolence, and charity in your interpretations and evaluations of arguments.

Magnanimity is largeness or greatness of spirit. The activity of argument about ethics is to find out or explain to another the truth about the issue at hand. If I can think only of winning a victory for myself in discussion, this is because my spirit is too small to recognize a goal outside of myself. This smallness or meanness of spirit, the opposite of magnanimity, is pusillanimity. The magnanimous person remembers that argument about health care ethics is not a competitive sport aimed at winning prestige for oneself. The argument is, rather, the only way human beings have to inquire into the truth of issues vital to their humanity. It takes a large spirit to keep in mind the goal of finding the truth, a goal that has nothing to do with self-glorification. Take care that you, in raising objections, do it, not with the aim of winning a debate, but with the aim of uncovering, as far as humanly possible, the truth in community with your partner in conversation.

Fidelity is being faithful to your partner in discussion (it doesn't matter whether the discussion is written or oral). You are faithful when your objection speaks precisely to the argument of the other. You may have noticed that I try to use direct quotations wherever possible in identifying and diagramming arguments, and when I had to supply my own words, I try to make clear in the diagram my own interpretation by the use of square brackets. These are examples of acts of fidelity. The opposite of fidelity is infidelity or unfaithfulness. If you are careless in how you present the argument you are evaluating, you risk being unfaithful to the author, your partner in that discussion. You are unfaithful when you misrepresent the argument of another (for example, in objecting to a crude or silly position that your partner did not actually say).

Benevolence (or "good will") is desiring or delighting that good things happen to another person. You should make your arguments and raise your objections with benevolence. Always be able to add these words, at least silently, to your objections and arguments: "You seek the truth in this matter, and therefore I want to share whatever insights I might possess with you, for I love you and this is how I show my friendship for you." If you lack benevolence in your arguments, your motive must be defective somehow. If you don't care about the other person, why are you bothering to talk? Just to get your way? Just to dominate a conversation? Just to show off? The opposite of benevolence is malice (or "malevolence"): not just lacking good will, but actually desiring or delighting that bad things happen to another, such as their humiliation in a conversation. The person with the defect of malice is truly evil.

Charity is thinking the best of other people. Charity assumes as far as possible that the motives of others are good and puts the best possible construction on their words and actions. The opposite sort of people are uncharitable: they assume that someone who disagrees with them in argument must be either stupid or evil. You will strive in your writing and conversation to show that you have the highest regard for the moral character and intellect of your partners in discussion. Thus abuse or disparaging remarks have no place in your objections. (It is not, however, necessarily abusive to show that another's claim leads to absurdity: it is sometimes the best way to show that a claim is false.) Make it your policy to come to believe that your partner is cruel or selfish or greedy or uncaring or sexist or racist only when every other interpretive option is exhausted. And before you ever conclude that your partner is stupid, you will assume that you are ineffective in expressing the truth you must know but they do not. Watch yourself as you raise objections to arguments. so that you act with charity and do not become uncharitable!

Magnanimity, fidelity, benevolence, and charity are excellences (or "virtues") of human character. Their lacks or opposites are defects (or "vices"). Show good character in all you do, including your arguments with others. Virtue is its own reward, by the way: the better your moral character becomes the more you will profit from the argument and the less you have to fear of being harmed by the behavior of others, for it is not your ego on the line in a game of winner-take-all, but rather a disinterested search for truth.

Finally, I must point out that these virtues--magnanimity, fidelity, benevolence, and charity-are ideals that no one possesses perfectly. So don't be discouraged if you find that you never possess them perfectly: that means you're like the rest of us!

Once you have completed this excercise you should:

Go on to Exercise4.1.6
or
Go back to Objection and Replies

E-mail George Rudebusch at George.Rudebusch@nau.edu
or call (520) 523-7091