Zoom Logo

Harvard Seminar on Intellectual Charity (January Session, Nate Otey) - Shared screen with speaker view
Jack Yensen
10:38
Hi Nate - Happy New Year and as we say in UK - break a leg!
Nate Otey
12:39
Hi Jack! I’m actually in Cambridge UK this year. You?
Nate Otey
16:44
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1CE2E2KEti1VHJ4T5U8SZXGmMOlX1N_RqWc3dFzu6EAM/edit?usp=sharing
Wendy Turgeon
24:19
I vote for 2
Katy Miller
24:23
All lives equally
Mathew Buchman
24:24
Number 2
Katrina O'Keefe
24:28
I vote 2
alan lam
24:28
#2
Kat Stevens
24:33
every one together but the animal one.
Dona Warren
24:36
Yep. #2!
Ornaith O'Dowd
24:40
#2
Jennifer Collins
24:41
Yes, I guess I would say 2 as well
Preston Stovall
24:44
1 or 2
alan lam
24:44
actualy, changing my to #1
Wendy Turgeon
24:57
In my two it might be 4
Wendy Turgeon
25:01
twon
Wendy Turgeon
25:06
town!!
Javier Hidalgo
25:16
2 plus disapproval of race-based appeals
Jason Riddle
26:17
Two, with the addition of people of all abilities.
Wendy Turgeon
37:20
3 seems obvous
Katrina O'Keefe
37:22
3
Preston Stovall
37:23
3
Katy Miller
37:23
Ask for clarification
Dona Warren
37:24
3
Jennifer Collins
37:25
3
Mathew Buchman
37:25
3
Ornaith O'Dowd
37:26
3
Aline Medeiros Ramos
37:28
3
Wendy Turgeon
41:59
It might help counteract the power relationship
Jennifer Collins
42:00
I totally buy that
Katy Miller
43:57
I see many students display black and white thinking, and I can see this being helpful in understanding more complex issues.
Wendy Turgeon
43:59
Maybe we need to set up the discussion with the expectation that clarification is not an attack but an invitation.
Ornaith O'Dowd
44:34
I think a lot of people are used to requests for clarification being done as a rhetorical tactic and are surprised that we might actually be for real.
Jason Riddle
44:52
Seems like there would need to be a certain amount of trust built between the instructor and the student beforehand.
Wendy Turgeon
44:55
Agree with Ornaith.
Dona Warren
45:04
The importance of body language, etc., can be one reason why this is hard to do in an online format in real life.
Lily Ní Dhrisceoil
45:06
I think a strong motivator for intellectual charity is simply that it is conducive to healthy, non-judgemental dialogue/debate
Ornaith O'Dowd
45:16
I always tell students "I know it's weird but I almost never ask rhetorical questions."
Kat Stevens
45:40
Teaching them that charity is persuasive - isn't that increasing or supporting the adversarial mondset we should try to reduce?
Dawn Chow
45:48
I often frame the clarifying questions as, "Can you explain what you mean by..." or "Can you say more about..." (rather than just "What do you mean by that?" which to me sounds more intimidating).
Wendy Turgeon
46:31
Maybe open any class with a review of how to question one another? Set up a simple and non-threatening example for practice?
Kat Stevens
46:58
So teach them the reasons for charity together?
Kat Stevens
47:08
the moral and the persuasive ones?
Gary Comstock
47:33
When I hear myself say to a student, "Could you clarify what you said about x?" I have come to hear myself challenging the clarity of what they said if not its validity. I've tried to just say "Could you say more about x?" which seems to be heard more as an open invitation to continue forward rather than a directive to (kind of) backtrack.
Dona Warren
48:00
I can also help to ask students "Why might it be useful to be charitable?" and get them to give the reasons.
Wendy Turgeon
48:39
Many fine people on both sides…
Wendy Turgeon
50:07
Here context might matter? You were on a tour, not in a class.
Nate Otey
53:16
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1CE2E2KEti1VHJ4T5U8SZXGmMOlX1N_RqWc3dFzu6EAM/edit?usp=sharing
Kat Stevens
53:29
Is there maybe a point in time where charity about the argument should be replaced by charity about the person? I.e.: Instead of "how could this be a good argument" "why would they say that, assuming thy are a general good person" and then build the answer on that basis?
Wendy Turgeon
56:17
Helpful point, Kat.
Dona Warren
57:18
Love that point, Kat!
Kat Stevens
59:33
Yes, exactly, which is why soemtiems not engaging is then the charitable thing to do?
Gary Comstock
01:01:03
Good point, Kat. Thanks. (Hadn't thought of the "non-engaging as charitable" idea!)
Preston Stovall
01:01:54
cf. work on anti-fragility in dealing with trauma
Kat Stevens
01:02:45
What about the danger of toxic charity?
Kat Stevens
01:03:11
As teachers, we have a lot of authority, even asking questions might lead them to asserting a view they would not endorse.
Kat Stevens
01:03:40
especially if they have a very different worldview, the ,most charitable interpretation from my point of view might not be what they meant from their point of view.
Dona Warren
01:04:44
Great point about the implications of differing worldviews, Kat!
Katrina O'Keefe
01:08:05
D
Dona Warren
01:08:05
D
Wendy Turgeon
01:08:06
D
Katy Miller
01:08:07
D
Jennifer Collins
01:08:08
D
Jason Riddle
01:08:09
d
Ornaith O'Dowd
01:08:10
d
Mathew Buchman
01:08:14
D
Lily Ní Dhrisceoil
01:08:14
D
Kat Stevens
01:08:50
It is the least about the person, and it does not insult.
Kat Stevens
01:09:00
And it is not untrue
Kat Stevens
01:13:57
D
Preston Stovall
01:14:00
D
Thando Khumalo
01:14:01
D
Dona Warren
01:14:04
D
Katy Miller
01:14:05
D
Jennifer Collins
01:14:18
D
Javier Hidalgo
01:14:26
C
Kat Stevens
01:14:27
But that might not be strong enough
Dona Warren
01:14:29
Oops! I meant C.
Kat Stevens
01:14:31
you might need C
Jason Riddle
01:14:33
globally, a, but locally d
Shawn Sutherland
01:14:38
D because of its allowance for range of choices.
Mathew Buchman
01:14:39
A
Thando Khumalo
01:14:46
B?
Wendy Turgeon
01:15:13
This was a difficult one.
Jack Yensen
01:15:55
What about alternatives that are missing?
Kat Stevens
01:16:11
depends on audience, probab;y
Wendy Turgeon
01:16:11
Don’t you need “ban” in the missing one?
Jack Yensen
01:17:01
Missing premises relate to premissary saturation
Sean Sinclair
01:17:21
depends on the costs of a ban. if a ban is very low cost (in context) then D might be enough
Dona Warren
01:20:01
A and D both seem to require the reader to actively do things to reduce inequality. B and C, on the other hand, seem to require to the reader to avoid making inequality worse.
Wendy Turgeon
01:21:14
It also seems we are deciding between setting up a valid syllogism vs. a strong/weak argument.
Nate Otey
01:23:34
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1CE2E2KEti1VHJ4T5U8SZXGmMOlX1N_RqWc3dFzu6EAM/edit?usp=sharing
Kian Mintz-Woo
01:23:34
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1CE2E2KEti1VHJ4T5U8SZXGmMOlX1N_RqWc3dFzu6EAM/edit?usp=sharing
Wendy Turgeon
01:23:34
Where are these in the slides?
Aidan Kestigian
01:36:38
Sorry folks, I went based off the timer, apparently the Zoom overlords would have given us a little more time 🙂
Aidan Kestigian
01:39:10
MindMup How-To Document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pR62tps5u4WYbFxgFm5P-WY3xSzo6pDlL1Z1P_dDPg0/edit?usp=sharing
Dona Warren
01:40:35
Thanks for this awesome resource, Javier!!
Wendy Turgeon
01:42:36
Yes, thanks, indeed. Most helpful and interesting.
Eric Main
01:42:40
Thank you for this!
Jennifer Collins
01:43:25
Yes! Thanks so much for making all of this available.
Kat Stevens
01:43:35
Thank you so much for this!
Aline Medeiros Ramos
01:43:35
This was great! Thank you!
Dawn Chow
01:43:46
Thanks! This was very interesting
Javier Hidalgo
01:43:48
Thanks, a lot of fun!
Ornaith O'Dowd
01:43:48
Thank you!
Jason Riddle
01:43:49
Thanks for the workshop!
Mathew Buchman
01:43:50
Thank you, Nate!
Joyce Mok
01:43:57
Thank you!
Lily Ní Dhrisceoil
01:44:01
thanks very much :)
Katrina O'Keefe
01:46:46
Thank you. This was very interesting and helpful.
Sean Sinclair
01:48:28
I have done pre/post testing of argument analysis skills eg spotting unstated evaluative premises (and used the tests to show progress). Happy to talk about it
Jennifer Collins
01:48:55
I have to go. Thanks so much!
Wendy Turgeon
01:49:08
I have to go but again, thanks to Nate and all for an excellent presentation.
Kat Stevens
01:57:40
Thank you for this!
Dona Warren
01:57:49
Great conference!!!
Shawn Sutherland
01:57:54
Thank you for this very informative discussion!
Sean Sinclair
01:58:10
thanks it was fun!