Beyond Feelings - Vincent Ruggiero [73]
Anatomy and Physiology
Medicine
Psychology
Is it reasonable or fair to hold people responsible for their actions before they are old enough to understand their moral and legal quality? At what age does a person reach such understanding?
Education
Psychology
Medicine
Ethics
Law
A special problem frequently arises with an inquiry into opinion. When we have found one or two respected thinkers who agree with what we believe or want to believe, we are inclined to feel satisfied. "Case closed," we're tempted to say; "this is the answer." Precisely at that moment we need to be especially cautious. If the issue is controversial, we should remind ourselves that a controversial issue, by definition, is one on which informed, careful thinkers may disagree, on which there is something reasonable to say for both sides.
It's worth remembering, too, that no evidence is perfect, and even the best is seldom beyond questioning. Appearances can deceive, some facts can remain undiscovered, and otherwise enlightened opinions can be limited in perspective.
APPLICATIONS
Chose one of the specific issues you clarified in application 1 or 2 of Chapter 18. conduct your inquiry into this issue in the manner explained in this chapter. Take careful notes. (The applications in the next chapter will build on this one.)
Choose one of the specific issues presented in Chapter 18 in the discussion of abortion, boxing, or juvenile crime. Conduct your inquiry into this issue in the manner explained in this chapter. Take careful notes. (The applications in the next chapter will build on this one.)
1 Lee Edson, "Will Man Ever Live in Space?" New York Times Magazine, December 31, 1972, pp.10ff.
2 Gordon Gaskill, "Which Mountain Did Moses Really Climb?" Reader's Digest, June 1973, pp.209-16
3 James R. Miller, "The Speeded-up Search for Life in Space," Reader's Digest, May 1973, pp.255-64.
4 Lucy Burchard, "The Snug Way," Intellectual Digest, February 1974, p.67.
P3-C19-4
CHAPTER TWENTY
INTERPRETING EVIDENCE
After we obtain evidence, we usually need to interpret it; that is, to decide what it means and how significant it is and to address the questions it raises. One of the most common questions concerns the resolution of apparent conflicts in evidence. As we have seen in previous chapters, experts do not always agree. Because people often view the same event quite differently, even eyewitness reports of honest people can conflict.
It is a popular view that the more scientific the procedure, the less need exists for interpretation. But that view is mistaken. If anything, a scientific approach demands more interpretation because it focuses more on identifying and classifying facts. Consider, for example, this unusual case. An ancient tomb was unearthed in Central China, containing the body of a woman who died about 2,100 years ago. Great care had been taken in burying her. She was placed in an airtight coffin filled with a special fluid. The coffin was encased in five larger boxes lined with five tons of charcoal. That larger unit was buried in a sixty-foot hole and surrounded by white clay.
Because of this extraordinary burial, when the woman's body was found, the flesh was still moist, the hair still rooted in the scalp, the joints still flexible, most of the internal organs intact. Specialists conducted a careful autopsy. They performed chemical analyses of the woman's hair, stomach, muscles, bones, lungs, gall bladder, intestines. They X-rayed her bones. To be useful, the mass of acts they obtained had to be interpreted. Only by studying the data, raising questions about it, and deciding what judgments were most reasonable did they conclude, for example, that she had borne children, had eaten a melon shortly before her death, and had probably died suddenly as a result of an obstructed coronary artery.1
Interpretation plays an important role not only in science but also in other fields. In fact, because in other areas the facts may