Critical thinking enhances one whom partakes in interdisciplinary studies by causing them to weigh out every solution before they make a decision. I believe that it is actually the essence of being interdisciplinary. This is portrayed by the Virtual Philosopher in which you are given a scenario while being able to pick from very different solutions. This causes the individual to put on their thinking caps and determine which solution would be the best fit for the issue. This process allows a student or researcher solving a problem to arrive at a more efficient solution by carefully evaluating each alternative. Alexis finds critical thinking to be vital in the major because it is our responsibility to make responsible judgments and reflections on our experiences and observations we have made in all or our areas. As interdiciplinarians, we have to make sure that we are integrating our areas properly and we cannot do this without proper critical thinking skills.Throughout the day we all use our critical thinking skills even if we don’t notice it.
Using the virtual Philosopher we are able to see the way in which use our critical thinking skills. In the exercises we are asked to make some difficult ethical and moral issues. Click the link below which will take you to an interactive exercise called Virtual Philosopher developed by Dr. Wade Maki from the Philosophy department at the University of North Caroline at Greensboro.Virtual Philosopher Link (must have updated FLASH to play correctly): http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.uncg.edu%2Fdcl%2Fcourses%2Fvicecrime%2Fvp%2Fvp.html&h=9fb851e85cc7f67e3418c55854c75479 Using the virtual Philosopher allowed us all to gain new insights to how our minds think and our moral fiber. We would love to hear what all of your experiences were with the Virtual Philosopher, Let us know, “ Do you agree or disagree with the outcome?”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I did the Virtual Philosopher and it was a little mean to me. :) It yelled at me for saying that I'd tell my friend she was odd when I said that lying is sometimes ok... it asked me why, if lying is sometimes ok, would you not spare your friend's feelings and tell her she wasn't odd? My response to that is that what I would really do wasn't an option, and I chose the closest one- I would tell her she was unique and focus on her good qualities, and all the qualities that make her who she is. I myself am a little "odd", but I wouldn't want to be "normal"- I think normal is overrated, and usually the "odd" ones are the most interesting anyway!
ReplyDeleteFor the liver transplant question, I chose to save the 8 year old sick boy. Now let me just say that I don't ever anticipate being in this kind of situation ever, and if I was I can't say if my answer would be the same or different. There are a lot of factors to consider in this situation, such as first-come-first-serve, which does make a lot of sense, and the fact that little Chris apparantly has the least chance of survival, which I did not think about (but Virtual Philosopher was quick to point out!), and I'm sure that if I was ever in such a situation I'd know a lot more details about the individuals and their unique needs and have at least one other person to bounce things back and forth with. Had I thought about the fact that Chris was probably least likely to survive the transplant, my answer would have probably changed to the woman with 6 kids. But again, I'd probably just put all the names in a hat and draw one out so everyone's got an equal chance. Or just let the doctors decide!! :)
ReplyDeleteCritical thinking is especially important for us IDS majors, because we use it to figure out exactly how to put every piece of the puzzle so it all fits and works together. There are more areas for us to consider than single major students, so it's vital that we figure out how to incorporate all of them to get the most out of what we are learning, especially since we generally take less classes per area than single major students.
ReplyDeleteWhile being faced to lie to a friend while my beliefs were totally against it, I chose to do so anyway. I don’t think that lying to anyone in any situation is morally justifiable or ethically correct. I was raised to tell the truth no matter what the outcome may hold. However, I also have a lot of respect for my friends and their feelings. I don’t like to see any of them emotionally scarred or depressed. This was hard decision to make because my values conflicted heavenly. However, I went against my morals and supported the happiness of my friends which caused my personal ethics to be inconsistent.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in the last two scenarios (the lifeboat problem and the liver problem) my personal ethics remained consistent with my choices that were made. I value human life with grain of salt and wholesomely believe that not one is greater than the other. Therefore, even if a passenger on the boat weighed more the others and it would mean the death of all, I would never force him to get off the boat. The same goes concept is applied for the liver scenario. No matter whom the patient is, in regards to their societal role, gender, age, or religion everyone should be treated equally in the process of “first come, first served.”
The Virtual Philosopher has communicated to me the conditions that id choose to an alternative based ethically or critically. I found that when friends’ feelings are for stake, I tend to disregard ethical resolutions and pick a solution that would result in their happiness. However, if the issue isn’t regarding friends and everyone is equally at stake, I tend to hold my ethical beliefs at heart and give everyone the fair chance that they deserve. I haven’t suffered from this mindset academically, but instead with personal experiences pertaining to friends. This is definitely an eye opener to me because it would prevent me from making wrong decisions based on the feelings of others, and judged more on the success of myself.
Katie, I agree with you completely with with being odd, which is simply being different. In today society some of the most famous people (Michael Jackson)or most successful are odd, however their difference is what makes them unique. However, i couldnt give the liver transplant to the little boy because i believe in equality. I'd have to give everyone a fair chance but more details to the situation for all the cases could alter my decision. As far as critical thinking goes, i think you have a great idea of what it entails!
ReplyDeleteWell, first let me say that making such decisions is much easier when you're just clicking buttons knowing that there is no ramifications for your choices. That said, according to the Virtual Philosopher I was consistent in all three situations.
ReplyDeleteIn the first one with the odd friend, I did the same thing Katie did and said I would tell her the truth because I think I would be able to say it in a way where it is honest and yet not hurtful.
In the second situation with the 400 guy, I went with keeping everyone on the boat which was the "correct" answer as far as being consistent goes, but the more I thought about it afterward the more I thought that that may have been slightly foolish because then everyone may have died.
The last situation was the hardest but I went with saving the homeless guy. I really wanted to save the single mom of six kids because I related to her the most since I am one of five kids and can't imagine having my mom taking away from me. But, at least on TV shows and movies and such, the "doctors" always say that whoever is next on the waiting list that is a match is the one to get the organ. So, I went with the first come, first serve thing. Who knows what I really would have done if it were a real situation though....
Sierra Allmand
sierra.allmand@gmail.com
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think critical thinking is an incredibly important part of IDS. It allows us to examine problems from many different angles to find the best solution. It also allows us to find different solutions that other people might not see.
ReplyDeleteI think the Virtual Philosopher is in some ways a completely awful judge of character. I believe a lot of the questions it asked fell into the shades of grey category in terms of morality. I also think it didn't give me enough information to effectively answer the scenarios. But that could just be me. It has shown me that I approach scenarios with a different mindset to most people, which is a good thing because I can add a different viewpoint to a situation. It also shows me that I have a more situational outlook; in other words, my opinion varies according to the subject.
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts on critical thinking match my applications of it in my Virtual Philosopher use. It also helps explain why I was so annoyed by the lack of information on the scenarios and the comments it gave me. I do think it was interesting, however to see how it scored my morality (or, apparently, lack thereof). After I finished the first time, to be honest, I took it again and chose the worst answers (in my mind) just to see what it would say. Conversely, I also chose the most moral answers. I thought it was interesting that it only really judged the extremes most correctly, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts on the dilemmas were both consistent and inconsistent. The friend dilemma I choose to spare my friends feelings, why tear someone down for no reason. I thought that the person should love them they way they are. The issue with the life boat, my way of thinking even though I said every life was equal, I thought that it was 11 other people and all the people that would be affected by their deaths if the 400 pound man didn't get off the boat. In my opinion, the 400 pound man should have offered to save all the other people and no one would have to make that decision. And the situation with the liver I just thought that the mother with six children should receive the transplant just because of the children. The six children are innocent by standards and shouldn't have to endure that pain and suffering, I think all the other candidates might see that but I think it would still be though. Honestly I felt uncomfortable with the liver transplant and the boat scenario, I would have a better understanding if I had more information of all people affected and don't think I was informed with the proper amount of info.
ReplyDeleteI chose very clearly-set morals: lying is always wrong, killing is never justified, and every human life is equal. With those edicts, all of my ethical decisions were consistent. I admit that the last situation was the most difficult. Personally, I would have liked to have spared the researcher who might have gone on to save countless lives had I given her a liver. But if every life is equal, then personal accomplishments, age, occupation, race, gender, etc. shouldn't matter, and I really do believe it. People often harp about how it takes a strong person to make a tough decision like that, but it takes an even stronger person to say, "No, choosing one person over many others is unethical. We will have a lottery." Though you might be called cold-blooded, or be accused of "passing the buck," you are only being true to intrinsic value of human life. If we are to use our critical thinking skills wisely, we can't rely on our gut reactions, or make decisions based on our emotions.
ReplyDeleteFemi, I agree with you on the friend scenario. I also was raised to tell the truth and be a true honest person. But also why would I try to tear someone down especially when they are in a vulnerable state. And I do believe that they deserve someone who likes them for them.
ReplyDelete