So You're Basically Just Switzerland Now?
In which we dance on the third rail issues of bioethics while debating my policy of viewpoint obfuscation in the classroom.
Can’t you tell by the hands and feet on this guy that this is AI generated image? (Courtesy of Bing’s Image creator powered by DALL-E)
One thing about bioethics, there are no shortage of hot topics that sit like the proverbial third rail on the EL train just waiting for instructors to fall into the tracks with both feet. The margins of life in bioethics afford us a good example. I just have to say the names: Abortion and Euthanasia. Hear the electricity crackling? The Dobbs decision at the Supreme Court turned that voltage up to 11. And not just for abortion.
The Hastings Center has a new article by Rebecca Dresser which argues that Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization has implications for end of life. Specifically that Dobbs conflicts with the 1990 Cruzan decision which upheld a strong right to refuse treatment. “The Dobbs ruling conflicts with the Court's 1990 Cruzan decision restricting the government's power to interfere with personal medical choices.“
If you are waiting for me to weigh in on this opining with all the angst and fury of twitter troll. You will be waiting a long time. I haven’t read the dissent in Dobbs well enough to have an opinion yet. On Miles to Go I am not going to opine on third rail cases. I’m going to take the same stance I do in my classroom. Here’s how it goes:
[scene interior. first day of class]
Me: My job is to test all of your moral intuitions so that you can have a clear, coherent, and justified position on these issues. So I going to do my best to keep you from finding out what my actual position is on these issues for as long as I can.
Student: (jumping in without being called on): So you’re just basically going to be Switzerland? Not take a stance at all?
Me: [reminding eager student to raise his hand] Not quite. Switzerland is famous for being neutral in foreign conflicts. I’m telling you whatever your position, you can expect me to challenge it from another angle so you can hear the other side. If the majority of the class is pro-something, I will suddenly become anti. That’s not quite being neutral. Is it?
Eager student (slightly disappointed and thinking I’m sus1): “I guess.” See as a philosopher, I”m trained to scrutinize all sides of a hot debate. Soon you will learn that too.”
[END]
In the the past I’ve been more blunt: “My job is to make your untested intuitions cry like little babies.” I’ve compared my Socratic style to the way nurses soothe patients when putting in an IV. “Yes, it will hurt, but only for a second. Yes I do know what I’m doing. Yes, you do need it.”
A great way to gage where I need to play devil’s advocate is to use real-time polling software. I like polleverywhere.com because the version I use is my favorite price: free. If the majority of the class thinks Dax cowart should have been able to go home after his initial admittance, then I give the paternalistic argument that he was in pain, etc and pain undermines our rational thinking etc. and I let them push back.
Am I wrong to obfuscate in this way? I’d be a hypocrite if I didn’t invite criticism. I do tell my students that I’m not so naïve to believe a) they won’t figure out my views on some issues or b) that my own deep biases won’t affect the way I argue. If I do my job well, however, most of the students will be in the dark as to my own view on third rail, hot topics. It’s a cliche but I want students to think for themselves.
[As an aside if you are a student and you feel your instructor is being two biased in their representation of a topic you care about, talk to them about how much debate in class they will tolerate and then offer to provide an opposing opinion. Chances are they will welcome a bit of back and forth but ask first and work out some way to signal its time to stop like “You make a valid point but we need to move on.” Then honor that social contract.]
One more controversial thing I promise my students: I will reveal all on the last day of class. Reveal day we call it. Students ask what I really think and feel and I tell them (after extracting a promise that they won’t go blabbing to people not taking the class.) Sometimes I have them guess if I’m a Utilitarian or a Kantian or something else. Sometimes, but, rarely they get it right. A fun time is had by all. I’ve yet to see any money changing hands from bets on my ideological bent, thank goodness.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sus for those who don’t play Among Us.