{"id":11899,"date":"2021-11-30T01:02:26","date_gmt":"2021-11-30T09:02:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/?p=11899"},"modified":"2021-11-30T04:37:14","modified_gmt":"2021-11-30T12:37:14","slug":"some-common-sense-about-common-sense-and-about-common-sense","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.oeconomist.com\/blogs\/daniel\/?p=11899","title":{"rendered":"Some Common Sense about Common Sense and about Common Sense<\/q>"},"content":{"rendered":"

I often hear or read Common sense isn't common.<\/q> or, ambiguously, Common sense isn't.<\/q><\/p>

The term common sense<\/q> refers to variety of things believed or formerly believed to be closely related. In some cases, the term is indeed a description<\/em>; in others, it is like Common Raven<\/q>, which began as a description or as an attempt at a description, but names<\/em> a now un<\/em>common bird.<\/p>

Consulting the SOED<\/abbr><\/cite>, I find about five definitions of common sense<\/q>. Archaically, common sense<\/q> refers to a supposed faculty that coördinated and united senses such as those of sight and of touch to form impressions of the world. The term may refer to ordinary<\/em> or normal<\/em> understanding (which must<\/em> be common). Common sense<\/q> may also refer to collective judgment<\/em> across some group of people. Philosophers may use common sense<\/q> to refer to the power by which generally accepted beliefs are formed in the absence of contemplation and of instruction. Normatively<\/em>, common sense<\/q> refers to reliable practical wisdom in everyday matters.<\/p>

I don't use the term common sense<\/q> much at all, but I occasionally use it normatively, as when I tell people that an introductory course in microeconomics will start with building-blocks of common sense but assemble them with uncommon care<\/q>. Now, I suppose that I could use those very same words without normative intent, but I really am hoping that the audience will accept the blocks as themselves reliable. I cannot<\/em> teach my audience everything<\/em>, and I shouldn't<\/em> have to teach those blocks to them.<\/p>

When I use common sense<\/q> normatively, the notions that I have in mind are of sound reasoning that is within the intellectual capabilities common<\/em> to human beings, and of the structures of belief that result from such application. Something that would not<\/em> be what I were normatively calling common sense<\/q> would be unsound or outside of the possibility<\/em> of common understanding. However, I'm more likely to say That should be<\/u> common sense.<\/q> than That seems like<\/u> common sense.<\/q> I'm even more likely to say That should be obvious<\/u>.<\/q><\/p>

I'm on the subject of common sense<\/q> because various people in various groups will treat beliefs as if<\/em> they are obvious to everyone who is not a fool<\/em> when they are no such thing<\/em>. Treating them as common sense — here using common sense<\/q> normatively — is a form of implicit or explicit begging of the question<\/em>; it is a violation of the rules<\/em> of proper discourse. That said, most of those who treat those beliefs as common sense sincerely, thoughtlessly regard most of them as such; these people are not violating the rules willfully.<\/p>

I've encountered this begging of the question by the political left, by the political right, and by political moderates. But I am at present most concerned by the misrepresentations from the left, because they have control of so much of the commanding heights of our culture. When a strong wind prevails, one leans against it, not against a wind of the past nor against a wind that may come in the distant future.<\/p>

Examples of propositions that some or all of the left treat as common sense<\/span> include<\/p>