TWO FROM THE NATION
The President's Character

First, an essay on the meaning of Dan Rather's 60 Minutes boo-boo:

Where Rather Was Right

If, as seems to be the case, the underlying point of the 60 Minutes II episode was accurate, then it's a sad comment on the rest of the press that they have relentlessly and repeatedly focused on what Dan got wrong and relatively ignored what Dan got right (namely, that pressure was put on Killian to "sugar coat" Bush's National Guard record, that Bush got into the Guard via favoritism, that he got paid for meetings he didn't attend, that he missed the physical he signed up for, and all the rest).

What Rather got right relates to yet another presidential narrative--the one having to do with the President's character. If indeed Bush skipped out on his National Guard obligations at the time, that does not speak well for his character then. And if he arranged to have this dereliction expunged from his file after he became President, that does not speak well for his character now. (It may also be a violation of the law.)

Click here for the rest.

Next, an interview with Princeton ethicist, Peter Singer:

The Ethics of George W. Bush

You've called George Bush an ethical "adolescent." What do you mean by that?

Lawrence Kohlberg argues that most people go through certain stages of moral development. Using his categories, and looking at some of the moral judgments Bush makes--not so much the substance of the judgments as the way in which he reaches his judgments--it seems to me that Bush is at a stage that is typical of adolescent boys. Most, though not all of them, later go on to a more reflective view of morality. Bush appears not to have done so.

Click here for the rest.

I studied some Kohlberg when I was getting certified to teach. I think that this might be the stage of moral development that Singer is talking about:

In the first stage of this level, people behave according to socially acceptable norms because they are told to do so by some authority figure (e.g., parent or teacher). This obedience is compelled by the threat or application of punishment. The second stage of this level is characterized by a view that right behavior means acting in one's own best interests.

At first, I thought that Singer might be referring to the "law and order" phase that comes some time after the "one's own best interests" phase. But, no. Bush really doesn't seem to give a damn about the law--it's all about helping out the wealthy class, his own people.

This Kohlberg stuff is pretty interesting, especially the thought that morality changes depending upon the perspective and experience of the person making a given moral decision. It's also pretty sad:

The third level of moral thinking is one that Kohlberg felt is not reached by the majority of adults. Its first stage (stage 5) is an understanding of social mutuality and a genuine interest in the welfare of others. The last stage (stage 6) is based on respect for universal principle and the demands of individual conscience.

(Emphasis mine.)

What this means is that most people never reach a level of moral understanding that I would consider to be enlightened. Really, this isn't rocket science either; I'm talking about what most people would recognize to be the moral principles espoused by Jesus Christ. People seem to have an intellectual understanding of higher morality, but just don't seem to be able to put their money where their mouths are. That is, their day to day behavior belies what they give lip service to.

Especially conservative fundamentalists. Like the President.

For more on Kohlberg's theory of moral development, click here.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$