Virginia Union University Ethics Course
Preliminary Teagle Findings
(Havis@bc.edu)
My Teagle course was designed to more fully engage students in processes of critical
thinking that did not simply reaffirm their existing beliefs but called upon the students to
develop intellectual habits which encouraged them to view ethical questions from
multiple perspectives. Given the general operating theme, the spirit of the course
resonated with my sense of the Teagle imperative associated with the pedagogy of
belief and doubt – namely to prompt students to question, foreground, and explore what
motivates their underlying belief structure and commitments. In applying the pedagogy
of belief and doubt framework to this particular course, my goal was to engage students
in an examination of the basis upon which they made determinations about the good,
the just, and what makes life worthwhile. The students’ ability to investigate these
issues was crucial for their ability to gain a better understanding of traditional Western
ethical theories and for gaining a better sense of how these theories related and
continue to relate to them. The following questions provided the broad framework for
course investigations: 1) How do I determine right action? 2) How do I judge what
is right/wrong? 3) What is virtuous behavior? 4) Do I have obligations to other people
and what is the nature of such obligations? 5) Are there universal, absolute ethical
standards or, are ethical standards relative? 6) Must I be free to engage in ethical
activity?
During the course of the semester, we explored such primary philosophical texts as the
Havis/Teagle p. 1
Apology, Nicomachean Ethics, Letter From Birmingham Jail, and Existentialism as a
Humanism to raise the core questions and understand how thinkers have historically
addressed core ethical questions. Class discussion aided students in developing the
capacity to critically engage the texts. I also brought in “thought experiments” that
further stimulated discussion by presenting more narrow scenarios within which
students could test out certain theoretical positions and raise additional questions about
the implications of these positions. Students responded well to the “thought
experiments” and to the Lemming Condition, a text that raises ethical questions in
parable form. The fact that the Lemming Condition worked indirectly to question and
challenge imbedded assumptions seemed to contribute its success as tool for
prompting inquiry concerning belief and doubt. Students’ oral exams and the final
philosophy project which required them to blend a course theory with a lived experience
also appeared to successfully engage inquiry concerning belief and doubt. Written
assignments and texts that directly questioned students’ basic belief structures were
less successful. Writing assignments posed technical difficulties for the students
because the assignments required students to provide cogent arguments demonstrating
mastery of theoretical concepts, leaving little room for deeper inquiry about belief and
doubt. Texts that directly challenged students’ core belief systems were also less
successful because the students appeared to view such challenges as an affront to their
religious faith. As such, students were less engaged in inquiries that invited them to
investigate their core Christian beliefs.
Havis/Teagle p. 2
Student resistance to certain types of inquiry, while explicit with respect to religious
belief, also suggested more subtle forms of cultural resistance to the sorts of inquiry
promoted in pedagogies of belief and doubt. In particular, a majority of students
surveyed agreed that doubting what you hold to be true is a sign of intellectual
weakness. These responses suggest that there are certain communities that will
naturally be more resistant to pedagogies of belief and doubt than other communities.
Given these preliminary findings, in conjunction with Richard Bland psychology
professor Roland Havis, I have begun to investigate the connection between cultural
community and willingness to actively engage in explorations of belief and doubt.
Findings thus far indicate that particular cultural communities can be divided into
epistemic communities that shape an individual’s willingness to engage certain types of
inquiry. Moreover, these epistemic communities can be correlated with personality types
(i.e., Myers-Briggs type indicators) and racial affinity. In so far as this is the case, the
data suggests that there are interesting relationships between epistemic and cultural
communities, race, personality type, and willingness to engage in inquiries concerning
belief and doubt. The implications of this information warrant further study.
Havis/Teagle p. 3