Provoking Thoughtful Dialogue…not gotcha questions, but give her something to think about. 

Notice my conversation with the student is friendly and engaging. We part as friends, not enemies.Suppose you want to engage a friend on abortion. Start by asking questions:

Step #1: Ask fact-finding questions.

Purpose: Help your friend clarify her assumptions and help you better understand her overall worldview. To get started, try one of the following:

• Are moral rules real and knowable or do we make them up for ourselves?
• What’s the difference between saying, “Chocolate ice cream is better than vanilla” and saying “It is wrong to torture toddlers for fun?”
• Do you think each and every human being has an equal right to life?
• What makes racism and sexism wrong?
• What makes humans equal in the first place?
• Where do our fundamental rights come from?

Where she answers correctly, affirm common ground with her. This will give you a foundation for asking deeper questions later. Where she answers incorrectly, ignore it for the moment. At this point, you are simply a detective trying to learn her worldview assumptions before crafting your follow-up questions.

Step #2: Ask follow-up questions:

Purpose: Test for intellectual consistency.

Consider the questions in step #1 above:

• Do you think each and every human being has an equal right to life? When she says yes, as I’m guessing she will, you reply:

“I agree. Human equality is essential. Given we agree that each and every human being has an equal right to life, if I can demonstrate that the unborn are human, would you agree that they, too, have the same right to life as you and I?” (Get ready for the back-pedalling to start.)

• What makes racism and sexism wrong? When she says, correctly, that each picks out surface differences that don’t really matter as a means of discriminating against a victim class, agree with her. Then, follow-up with:

“In the past, we discriminated on the basis of skin color and gender. We both agree that was wrong. If it is wrong to hurt people because of their skin color or gender, why is it okay to hurt them because they are small, less developed, and dependent?”

• What makes humans equal in the first place? She may stumble here, unsure of what to say. She might assert self-awareness, ability to interact with others, ability to feel pain, etc., and think that because the unborn do not have an immediately exercisable capacity for those things, she’s neutralized your challenging question. Nope. Now you further unsettle her with this follow-up:

“We both agree equality is important. But I want to understand your foundation for it. If self-awareness gives us value and a right to life, and we don’t share that trait equally, those with more self-awareness have a greater right to life than those with less, right?”

• Where do our fundamental rights come from?

When she says the government, point out her insecure foundation for human rights. It’s okay to get a bit more wordy here:

“I’m still concerned about your foundation for human rights. The same government that grants fundamental rights can take them away, right? I mean, the Supreme Court once said that slaves did not have a right to freedom and that racial segregation was okay. If our fundamental rights depend on the government granting them, how safe are any of us? So here’s my question: What’s wrong with saying that each and every human being has fundamental rights, including the right to life, simply because he or she is human?”

Expect more back-pedalling here. That’s okay. Your goal at this point is to give her something to think about, not win the day. Arguments are seldom won on the spot. They are won weeks (months) later when the person is alone with his or her thoughts and privately admits that you carried the exchange with superior reasoning.