Charles Krauthammer, MD may he RIP

The bold above is an approach I also value greatly which, IMO, is part of the foundation of the Socratic Method----an approach to decision making I find highly correlated to civility. One must consider all side of an arguement equally in order to become enlightened. Only the enlightened can coexist in harmony.

Click to expand...

dminches said:

I think the lesson is that it starts at the core. If someone exhibits integrity and honesty then their opinions should be listened to even if one doesn't agree. But the minute someone shows themselves to lack those qualities then their opinions cannot be trusted since they are likely being used to achieve personal gains and power. JMO, of course.

I have been reading and listening to a lot of what CK had to say over the years. His positions were never consistently aligned with one group. They spanned the gamut of ideologies.

Click to expand...

PeterA said:

Whether true or not, I have the impression that Krauthammer listened to other's opinions. He was smart, he did his research, he listened, and then he presented his view on a subject. He did all this while remaining calm, respectful and civil. We need more people like him in the public arena to lead by example how one should behave.

Click to expand...

jazdoc said:

“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion... Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them...he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.” J.S. Mill

Click to expand...

PeterA said:

Whether true or not, I have the impression that Krauthammer listened to other's opinions. He was smart, he did his research, he listened, and then he presented his view on a subject. He did all this while remaining calm, respectful and civil. We need more people like him in the public arena to lead by example how one should behave.

Click to expand...

PeterA said:

Whether true or not, I have the impression that Krauthammer listened to other's opinions. He was smart, he did his research, he listened, and then he presented his view on a subject. He did all this while remaining calm, respectful and civil. We need more people like him in the public arena to lead by example how one should behave.

Click to expand...

marty said:

I'm late to this thread, but not late in my admiration for Charles Krauthammer. More than any other commentator/pundit/columnist, I reserved my greatest anticipation for his commentary whenever he was on any broadcast. "What does Krauthammer have to say? is all I cared about hearing. And for the most part, it was true. He was, along with other select voices such as Irving Kristol, Norman Podhoretz, the most important and thoughtful conservative thinker of our time. I find it interesting that like Kristol (father of neoconservativism) and Podhoretz (founder of Commentary Magazine), he grew up decidedly liberal (he was a speech writer for Mondale) and became a conservative later in life, as did I. Perhaps that's why I found him so endearing and important to my own edification. If you have the opportunity to view "In his own words", a 1 hour special about him recently broadcast on TV, I would highly encourage it. Now that he's gone, I will try and hold him a bit closer thus summer by reading his book "Things that matter", a series of writings written over 3 decades. As I felt when listening to him, my hope is that I will be richer and wiser for reading his essays. Erudition, intellect and wit is generally a winning combination. In Krauthammer's hands, it should be a wonderful read.

Click to expand...