THINKRIGHT TEST FOR OFFICE SEEKERS

I am writing a series of articles called ThinkRight...it's about good thinking, the elements of good thinking, the benefits of good thinking, and the penalties we pay when we fail to ThinkRight.

This question comes to mind:  Does not a person living in a free society have the right to choose, intentionally or by default, not to engage in good thinking?  And the answer, generally, is Yes,   I say "generally" to limit that right to those whose thinking, whose decisions, affect only themselves.

But the answer is a resounding No when that person's thinking and decisions impact other people.  And that is the case with regard to our public officials.  Their ability, and propensity, to ThinkRight is critical and consequential to the rest of us.   We can check the propensity part by examining their prior actions, their record.  But how do we check their ability?

My suggestion:  half of the LSAT  exam, taken by those seeking to be admitted to law school, is Critical Reasoning, and tests their ability to think logically.  I propose it be given to all those running for, or being appointed to, elected office.  The voters would remain free to vote for whomever they wish, including those who fail the test...but at least the voters would have critical information about those to whom they seek to give authority to pass and regulate laws that affect, restrict and tax our lives, send our people off to combat, etc.

Thought you might like to test yourself on a Critical Reasoning type question:

Advertisement:  "My doctor prescribed this new headache pill and, boy, was he right.  Took one the other day and my headache went away in less than an hour.  You have a headache?  Take this new pill."

Identify three logical fallacies in this advertisement.

1.  The fact that a doctor prescribes some medication does not mean it is the right, or a good, medicine to take.  Doctors are not infallible and we DO NOT KNOW why he prescribed it (perhaps he owns stock in the company that produces it).

2.  There is NO PROOF the pill cured the headache.  The fact that the headache went away shortly after the pill was taken, does not prove cause and effect.  The headache might have gone away even if the pill had not been take, perhaps even sooner.

3.  The fact that the pill may have worked for the person in the advertisement, DOES NOT PROVE it will work for you (not all headaches are the same, not all people respond the same way to the same medication).

Wouldn't you like to know if  that person seeking your vote, or to be appointed to public office, can  THINKRIGHT?

Seems logical to me.