Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2016

The Current Transcript for September 25, 2017

Host: Anna Maria Tremonti

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Listen to the full episode

Prologue

[Music: Theme]

SOUNDCLIP

We are not going to play politics with football players, with football coaches. We are not participating in the anthem today. Not to be disrespectful to the anthem, to remove ourselves from the circumstance. People shouldn't have to choose.

ANNA MARIA TREMONTI: NFL games became a wave of protests yesterday as defiant athletes, coaches, owners even offered visible support to those athletes U.S. president Donald Trump attacked in speech and tweets. The division over not standing for the national anthem is emblematic of the divide in the U.S. and beyond over race, rights, social justice, equality. So how do we confront this? We can all yell, there can be nasty fights. But Michael Sandel argues we can think and rethink to change the discourse around some of the biggest challenges facing us today. Michael Sandel teaches philosophy. He's a rock star of philosophy and he joins me in an hour. Also today you may think from the sounds of this that Mike Trauner is just another guy working out.

SOUNDCLIP

[Breathing in and out]

I should not be able to do most of things that I do and I do them. So as long as you actually have a whole hearted attempt, just keep pushing forward, brought people here. We all have aches and pains.

AMT: His aches and pains come from massive injuries both legs amputated, hands shredded, arms broken, brain injury all from an IED blast in Afghanistan nine years ago. This week he joins active and former soldiers in the Invictus Games. His story is a journey from near death, to defiance, to dedicated athleticism but it's also a love story. Hear Mike Trauner and his partner Leah Cuffe in half an hour. Before we get to those conversations, remember this?

SOUNDCLIP

Bueller. Bueller. Bueller. Bueller.

AMT: And that iconic movie from the 80s Ferris Bueller's Day Off was a privileged adventure. In Canada today, absenteeism is above average and Nova Scotia is getting tough. We're starting there. I'm Anna Maria Tremonti. This is The Current.

Back To Top »

Nova Scotia gets tough on students with strict school absenteeism policy

Guests: Michael Cosgrove, Charles Pascal

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: How often do you miss?

VOICE 2: Like a couple times a week.

VOICE 1: Were you there today?

VOICE 2: No.

VOICE 1: Why didn't you go to school today?

VOICE 2: Well I was supposed to be going into [unintelligible] to visit my grandmother at the hospital but that didn't end up happening because something popped up, so I came in town with my mom.

AMT: Well that's the voice of I suppose we're not going to give her name. She's a teenager we spotted playing hooky from school last week at the Mic Mac mall in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia.

SOUNDCLIP

VOICE 1: And what did your mom say about you missing so much school?

VOICE 2: She doesn't like it. She's told me she wants me to start coming to school more often, now.

VOICE 1: You must be behind.

VOICE 2: No, I will ask from my work and do it at home.

VOICE 1: And your mother cares but not that much, or?

VOICE2: She just tries to wake me up in the morning because I kind of just throw things out at her, tell her to leave the room [chuckles].

VOICE 1: Whoa. So it's like a daily thing like “go to school.”

VOICE 2: Yeah.

VOICE 1: And you get a lot of calls from the school to your place saying “where has she been?”

VOICE 2: Well, no, usually my mom would call in and tell them that I won't be at school that day.

AMT: Well it turns out that young woman is not alone. Absenteeism is such a problem in Nova Scotia that new stricter rules are being brought in by the ruling Liberal government. Starting next month high school students who miss more than 20% of their classes can be failed, no matter how good their actual grades are. The new rules will also mean that students can no longer simply pick up the work they missed from their teachers unless they have the permission of the principal. Michael Cosgrove is a high school English teacher in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. He helped advice on this new policy and he's in our Halifax studio. Hello.

MICHAEL COSGROVE: Hello. Well you just heard that student, while she's in the mall instead of the classroom. What did you hear?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: I heard a student who you know is out of class and a student who's parent wants them in class. And from her point of view it sounds like she thinks she's on, you know, on top of the game but I'm not sure what the reality is.

AMT: What answers do you get when you ask students why they're absent?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: Gees, that varies quite a bit. I mean you could have obviously illness. You could have an appointment with a specialist with a doctor, dentist. You could have sports clubs. You could a vacation. And so of course you just have people who will just tell you they you know didn't come, slept in.

AMT: And beneath all those explanations what do you think is going on with some of those kids?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: I mean I think that it has always been an issue in terms of you know you're always going to have kids who skipped class. I mean there's you know you play the classic clip from Ferris Bueller's Day Off. Right. And I don't think that's anything new but if you make it easy and if you make it so that there are ton of consequences if you if you miss, I think that in the end you'll see an effect on overall attendance and the climate of the class.

AMT: And so in that tape it sounds as if the mom is permitting her daughter's absence by calling the school dropping by picking up what she misses. Is it the parents who are failing to get their kids to school?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: You know we can make a policy and we can try to enforce certain rules for sure. But I think ultimately the biggest effect on attendance is what drives attendance are the parents for sure. That's my opinion.

AMT: And so what's it like in your classroom how big an issue is this?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: Well when I started teaching 15 years ago the policy was if you miss 15% of your class then you could lose credits. And then we moved to a situation for a number of reasons where we just abandoned that altogether and you couldn't remove a student for missing any time. And since we've done that I've noticed quite a significant difference. And at first I didn't really mention it to other teachers. OK. You know. I noticed less people coming and eventually talked to the teachers and you know “is anyone else experiencing this?” “Yeah” like I mean you know it's it kids out on a day or you know sometimes more. Sometimes you know you do have good days but it's common. So it's not just you.

AMT: It's common like how many? Like what portion of the class?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: It depends on the time of the year. I think a winter is the worst time right. With the weather and stuff like that. But you know that wouldn't be uncommon to see six to eight kids out. You know I mean class sizes did go up a little recently too. But you know they were up around - I've had class of 38 40 kids. But now this year we have caps so. So I think that will improve things too.

AMT: Well what effect does the absenteeism have on your classroom?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: I think ultimately it falls on the teacher because I mean we can have anything in a policy that says you don't have to give this kid work unless you ask for the principal, but ultimately you know the teacher wants everyone to be caught up. And so when you miss class the first thing that happens is a teacher is going to try to catch you up. So if you've got a bunch of different students missing different times and on different schedules, the teachers constantly scrambling to keep everyone on pace, whether that's you know using your prep blocks or lunch hours or you've got things ready for them. I think overall the class slows down. As a rule because there's much more is put on the teacher to sort of keep pace with all these different schedules.

AMT: And like what are the excuses that you get for kids not being there when you ask?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: Like I said I mean I think that if you make it easy there's no real consequences at the end of the day and the students sees that “I can miss as many as I want. The teacher is going to catch me up” then you know a lot of times you can come up with any type of excuse, whether it's you know just not coming, or just got better things to do than come here when they know they can just come and grab the work and you'll get them caught up. So I think that's approach has been taken. It's a kind approach. It's a nice approach but I think it's not sustainable. And the climate of the classroom, if everyone's there and everyone's working together and we're working in teams and we're you know all present, it is a different feeling to a classroom than if you constantly people coming and going.

AMT: I have a clip I'd like to play of Claudia Chender. She's the education critic for the NDP in Nova Scotia. She's concerned the new policy may unfairly penalize some students.

SOUNDCLIP

In many many many cases, and my child in school is included here. There are children who will wait months and months and months to meet with a mental professional if they're having a challenge in school. So that is a big challenge because if that mental health issue is preventing them from attending such that their attendance becomes an issue under this policy, they may be unfairly penalized for what we believe is a lack of government resources.

AMT: Well what do you think of what she says there, Michael Cosgrove?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: You know I think that teachers and educators have always been pretty flexible and pretty understanding and I don't think that this policy is going to you know unfairly treat people or marginalize students. It's first of all it's pretty generous. You can miss up to 20%. That's 18 classes per term. And I think ultimately, too, the end of the day I mean when you miss a certain amount of time for whatever reason I'm just not sure that it's realistic to say you've got everything you need to pass that course. I mean that could happen for a number of other venues. I could be doing a scuba diving course. I mean if I miss a certain amount of time, do I get certified there? I've got to make it up somehow. So ultimately we're going to try to help those students who get caught up for sure, who need you know special circumstances. But this what we're trying to do here is keep the kids in school.

AMT: Well what if they're being bullied? What if they do have mental health issues? What if they have undiagnosed mental health issues where they can't get out of bed? We don't know what we heard that young woman say. Or what if they have parents who just you know who aren't capable of, for whatever reason, giving them that that sort of incentive to get to school? Are you punishing the kids for something that is an underlying problem?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: I mean some of those issues you bring up are real issues for sure. I think they're less common than you think. So this policy isn't designed to cover you know every situation. You just can't have policy that does that. So are there going to be instances where people have to you know be proactive, help out, make accommodations? Yes there is and we have a lot of frameworks in place to deal with those for sure.

AMT: So do you think these new rules will get more students to class?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: I believe so. I really do.

AMT: And are you willing to go to the wall up for those kids who do miss to say “no I'm not giving you your work. You can show up”?

MICHAEL COSGROVE: I mean you know that's part of the issue. The other the other issue is that when you reach a certain point you know you're going to have to make a decision whether or not you know your absence is worth getting the course or not. But I think really the policy is important but ultimately I think this is a conversation that's a bit broader than this. In the end the conversation is about attendance in general. You know why are students missing school? And you know what can we do to keep them you know coming to school? It's broader than the attendance policy itself I think.

AMT: OK. Well thanks for speaking with us today.

MICHAEL COSGROVE: No problem. Michael Cosgrove, high school English teacher in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. He's part of the group that approved new rules to fight school absenteeism in the province of Nova Scotia. Let the voice of another young person in Nova Scotia. Emma Dobson was in high school until last year. She has yet to graduate. This is what she says about the classes she missed.

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound: Bell ringing]

[Music]

For the four years that I was there, it was very difficult to attend the entire time. I don't want to put the school down but the schools don't really help if you have issues, outside of school. So you're kind of on your own to figure out your own thing out and they don't communicate with you and help you outside of school. It's just you have to be in school and do yourself in school and that's about it. Sometimes I am sitting in the cafeteria, being told to go to class. I would go sometimes and I'd get there and then I end up getting frustrated because I didn't understand the work and I would leave. I missed, oh my, almost a whole complete year all together, over my four years, maybe a year and a half. I just figured the teachers would be more willing to help. Well it's stressful because I am now 19 years old. I have a baby. I should have been done high school by now and I just feel like it could have been a lot easier than it was.

AMT: Emma Dobson in Nova Scotia. Charles Pascal is a professor at the Ontario Institute of Studies and Education. He's a former deputy minister of education in Ontario. He's in Picton, Ontario today. Hello.

CHARLES PASCAL: How are you, Annamaria? Well I'm interested in knowing what you think. Let's start with that clip we just heard from Emma. What do you make of what she said?

CHARLES PASCAL: It breaks my heart. You know the last thing that Mr. Cosgrove said in your interview was that you know the attendance policy really doesn't get at the larger picture about why the kids are coming to school. Well for me that's a solution in search of a problem. They have to ask the question Why are kids like Emma coming to school. You start with that. You don't start with an independence in which in fact I think is actually going to increase absenteeism. I mean the moment you say that you're you list of 18 classes giving permission to other kids to take that extra day or two. So I just think they've got it all wrong. Well if I had a large percentage of my students who were not coming to my class, first place I'd look in the mirror; regarding the nature of what's going on, regarding the schools and the relationship with parents.

AMT: Okay. There's a lot to unpack here but let's start with looking in the mirror. How much is that the teacher's responsibility to make it exciting or interesting for individual students because they might all have different views of what that might be?

CHARLES PASCAL: Well again Mr. Cosgrove have said the policy is not designed to deal with every situation which as a matter of fact, great pedagogy, great teaching is about adapting to the individual differences of each and every student that you have in your charge. And so I noticed, I did a little bit of research regarding the commission or the council that was set up that Mr. Cosgrove was part of. He sounds like a great teacher. It was entitled improving classroom conditions. There was very little in what they came up with the deals with how do you deal with getting a greater understanding of who the Emmas are. What were her conditions or personal conditions that led her to stay away? What's the relationship between the school and the parents? You know the one thing that's missing from all the list of recommendations from this improving classroom conditions is parent engagement. And usually parent engagement in our schools in Canada is a one way street. It's about the schools taking care of things when the kids are there and the open door is there for the parents. But if large numbers of parents aren't coming through that door for different reasons, reasons of culture or language or a whole bunch of other things, it's not a two way street. So it's not just about what individual teachers need to do. It is about understanding who each of their kids are not just as learners but as young people. But it's important for the school to have a greener policy and approach to doing outreach so that the relationships with the parents and guardians is a reciprocal one where they collaborate regarding what's going on here.

AMT: What can you tell us about how truancy plays out across Canada?

CHARLES PASCAL: Well I don't know if there's any comparative research that's looking at it, but wherever it's usually high the first step has to be to answer the question “Why what's going on?” Is it simply in early high school, in late elementary school? Is it about you know the onset of adolescence? Is it about a lack of interest that the kids are not connecting who they are or their interests and the things they like to do the way they like to learn with what's going on in the classroom?

AMT: Or is it issues at home? Like it could be lots of things right?

CHARLES PASCAL: You know there was a clip from the NDP critic regarding mental health issues. What's the connectivity between each school and each school board with all of the family child and youth sports in the community? It's not the teacher's job to be a diagnostician regarding something at play but we want teachers to be well-trained enough to raise a question mark about the nature of what's going on with the child. There could be abuse at home. There could be undetected mental health issues as you pointed out. And the key is for the school to raise a question mark and then have some kind of diagnostic referral and intervention to community support. So when schools are disconnected from community supports these things can be unusually difficult, in terms of the school as a place for actually improving mental health rather than making it worse.

AMT: You know I was reading on the weekend that in California in Illinois kids were encouraged to bring bags of their dirty clothes to school for washing and it was a pilot project and they found that mass attendance went up.

CHARLES PASCAL: Whoever's behind that kind of experiment is probably - this is just a guess, I haven't read what you read but you have [unintelligible] clearly - somebody has done a diagnostic there, where they looked at the community and they've said “look this is a community where the poverty rate is unusually high and lower income people probably don't have washing machines and drying machines at home. So let's provide them a little community support. It's a non-stigmatizing kind of thing. And bring your clothes at the school.” So all of a sudden you're taking an element which could be a driver or an inhibitor and you turned the school into a magnet for reasons that the schools were not invented and that is to wash your dirty laundry. So that there's a clever kind of thing going on behind somebody like that. I may be guessing but I would guess that's why they did it.

AMT: So you're making the point you have to get to the reasons for absenteeism before you start changing the rules.

CHARLES PASCAL: Why aren't the kids coming in? You know again Mr. Cosgrove who again sounds like a great history teacher. He says the attendance policy is not designed to deal with every situation. I'm sorry. You've got to begin with what does every situation look like? There's idiosyncratic ways regarding why kids are not coming to school. They could be - In my case when I was in the second grade I was bored stiff and I either stayed at home or got kicked out of school because I was bored. I wanted to get kicked out so I can go home and read the books I wanted to read and do in my own pace.

AMT: Okay. Charles Pascal. We have to leave it there but thanks for your thoughts today.

CHARLES PASCAL: Thanks, Anna Maria.

AMT: Charles Pascal professor at the Ontario Institute of studies and education at the University of Toronto. Former Deputy Minister of Education in Ontario. He's in Picton, Ontario let us know what you think of what he's saying. You can tweet us @TheCurrentCBC find us on our website cbc.ca/thecurrent. Click on the Contact link. Stay with us. The news is next and then Canada is playing host to this year's Invictus Games for wounded soldiers. We'll meet one competitor in our next half hour.

SOUNDCLIP

So my name's Master Corporal Mike Trauner, retired. My titles are MMV. So motor medal of valor and CB. And my nickname is Mega Traun. And all I'm trying to do for my warm up is regular [unintelligible] breathing, get my body used to get ready to do something exertive. And I am also just going at a pace to, all right, I can obviously just keep talking to you as well. So this machine it's always fighting you. It always feels like you're going uphill. No matter what so I'll do 20-25k every day, but the equivalent of that being on the road maybe above 40k. It's. Got to go faster and faster and faster and maintaining paces. And it's very physically exhausting. There is not really much to it. You just have to have strong arms and really good endurance.

AMT: We will hear more from Mike Trauner in out next half hour. I am Anna Maria Tremonti, this is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

After 18 surgeries, Canadian 'Mega Traun' set to compete in Invictus Games

Guests: Mike Trauner, Leah Cuffe

AMT: Hello. I'm Anna Maria Tremonti and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

AMT: Still to come He's a Harvard philosopher but he doesn't live in an ivory tower.

SOUNDCLIP

I don't think it's possible to do political philosophy without attending to the actual political circumstances we face in our world.

AMT: We're bringing some of the big philosophical questions into the real world with Star philosopher Michael Sandel in half an hour. But first soldiering on.

[Music: Adaptation theme]

SOUNDCLIP

What I'm doing now is putting on these gloves. You don't necessarily need gloves to roll. But for myself I have extensive damage to both my hands and all my fingers as well. So the gloves actually does provide a layer of support and protect my skin which I have significant scar tissue throughout. And I have a design that I could just wield like get out of my wheelchair, transfer directly over to my rowing machine. So now I'm strapped in. My wife's going to hand me my handle and I'm just going to start off at the really quick warm up just to get my muscles going again.

AMT: Well that is Mike Trauner, Mega Traun to his friends, doing a daily workout. He's been training especially hard because this week he's competing in the Invictus Games. It is the event set up by Prince Harry for injured soldiers to get together and compete not as warriors but as athletes.

SOUNDCLIP

MIKE TRAUNER: So I am rowing an indoor Erg it's called, it's indoor rowing. We're stationary we're not on the water. That's a whole another ball game altogether. So typically in the morning I'll do either weights or rowing. I can't do both at the same time but in the afternoon typically what I'll do is some cycling because cycling I can go for long distance and I really work my body.

[Inhaling and exhaling]

MIKE TRAUNER: Now the computer just relays back to me what my power output is, my stroke rate and my projected meters for 30 minutes. You've got to find that sweet spot to get maximum speed to power ratio to.

[Inhaling and exhaling]

MIKE TRAUNER: And depending on the higher setting. There's one through 10. It's called the drag factor. Right now for my warm up I just have it set to seven. But if you go all the way up to 10 I mean it's very intense. So anyway that was a good one. Ten did seem a little bit hard. I kind of fell behind because just the drag was so much. So tomorrow when I do this I'll probably drop it down to a 9 and see where I can go from there.

LEAH CUFFE: Babe you've had enough? Okay.

AMT: Mike Trauner part of an elite group of 90 Canadian soldiers active and retired participating in the Invictus Games underway in Toronto. About 550 soldiers from 12 countries around the world will be competing. Every soldier has a story and this story fits into our project this season, Adaptation. Mike Trauner will represent Canada in two events, hand cycling and rowing. The hard work and the adaptation he has made to get to this point will be familiar to soldiers and their families who've had to adapt to life after serious injury. Mike and his wife Leah Cuffe, who we heard her decided that work just now joined me from our Ottawa studio. Hello.

LEAH CUFFE: Hello.

MIKE TRAUNER: Hi good morning.

AMT: That sounds like a tough workout.

MIKE TRAUNER: That's an understatement. It takes a lot of effort to be able to do that and keep up the pace. I'm going to be doing a four minute and a one minute roll. The one minute anybody could pretty much get on and just give it their all but the form it really does take a lot out of you, and it takes a lot of effort a lot of skill.

AMT: Leah, when he's working out what's your role?

LEAH CUFFE: I usually standby just in case there's any sort of equipment malfunction or if he you know needs water, towel or anything like that. If a strap lets go while he's in a row like there's a very good chance if that happens that he'll fall out of the seat actually. So I'm there sort of as a spotter.

AMT: And Mike your friends call you Mega Traun. Why is that?

MIKE TRAUNER: The name actually came before he was even injured. Because my last name is Trauner but I'm a mega-sized I'm six foot four over 200 pounds. So the guys just started calling me Mega Traun. After the injuries, now that I have bionic legs, the name kind of stuck, you know half man half machine. So, Mega Traun and that's kind of what I go by now.

AMT: Let's talk about your injuries. Essentially the doctors have rebuilt parts of your body. Can you tell us what your injuries were?

MIKE TRAUNER: On December 5th 2008 I was injured in an IED accident, a roadside bomb while on a foot patrol. I've lost both legs. My left leg is an above knee amputation and my right side is a below knee amputation. My left arm is broken in three places. My left hand was broken in 25 places. My right arm also has extensive damage from surgeries. Like scar tissue everywhere. My right hand thumb was blown off and my C-7 assault rifle actually shrapnelled and it went right through my hand. And the scar is actually still there to this day.

AMT: What more do you remember about that day Mike?

MIKE TRAUNER: Unfortunately I remember the entire incident. So on the roadside bomb after it went off I remember flying through the air. I didn't know I actually got blown up at that time but I was airborne for about four seconds. And when I landed I landed back in the crater which is about a metre deep and probably about the size of a large vehicle or in circumference, so it was quite large. And it ended up being two large bombs strapped together that went off. The size of the blast initially was what saved my life. If you believe it or not it's because it threw me out of the main debris field from the blast. So the main pieces of shrapnel that splintered off from the bomb actually missed my entire body because I was airborne at that time. So I did get some pretty large piece of shrapnel that hit me in the legs. You know they took my legs but I also had pieces about the size of a pop can that impact me in the femur. They stood up the scars to this day. I also still have had extensive surgeries and part of my quadriceps are missing as well. And on top of that sum I got some shrapnel to the eyes had some hearing damage. And I also have a traumatic brain injury as well which affects my short term memory, so.

AMT: When it all happened you didn't you didn't realize how badly injured. You were worried about somebody else who was with you, were you not?

MIKE TRAUNER: Yes. My driver was hurt too. He was sprayed head to toe with shrapnel. And I heard him yelling for help. And initially I thought it was actually him that was the amputee. I didn't even realize it was me. So when I attempted to actually get out. But your whole body is vibrating so you can't really even move. My whole face, my eyes, my mouth is just filled with dirt. So in that aspect I was scared because I just couldn't get up to - We had come under contact so I couldn't actually engage the enemy forces that are coming at us, because you know I just wanted to do my job but I couldn't because I was basically an like a type of paralysis. Your body's in such shock that you can't move. And I didn't even know I was injured until I raised my arms. My arms were smoking and you know my gloves are melted in my hands. And of course my arteries both my radials were slashed in my arms so there was blood spurting out in my arms. I was conscious the whole time. Well until I died the first time.

AMT: You say that as a matter of factly “until I died the first time” what does that mean?

MIKE TRAUNER: I bled to death the first time. Everything just kind of went white. You know I had a little bit of a near-death experience people talk so much about.

AMT: And then they took you to Germany.

MIKE TRAUNER: Yes.

AMT: Well Leah, let's just go back to the day that he was injured. How did you find out? What happened?

LEAH CUFFE: Well I received a phone call, actually it was four 04:43 in the morning when the phone rang. I was a wide awake. It was one of those restless nights you know just I don't know I kind of felt like something was wrong but I just wasn't sure. And the phone rang and I knew right away that something horrible had happened and I was hoping that it wasn't Mike. Most of our friends actually deployed with Mike at the time. So all the girls, all my girlfriends kind of got together before their deployment. And we were under the understanding that at least one of us, there's a very good possibility that we'll be getting a phone call and it just happened to be me.

AMT: And what did they say?

LEAH CUFFE: They introduced themselves as the padre and asked me to get up and turn the lights on and that they were on their way over to my house because something had happened.

AMT: And they didn't tell you what.

LEAH CUFFE: No not on the phone. Like within seconds the door - somebody was knocking on my door. so I can only assume that they called from my driveway before I even invited them in. I insisted on knowing if he was still alive, which they actually did confirm.

Amt: How were you reacting through this, Leah?

LEAH CUFFE: It's funny. Like I didn't - I didn't cry. And I think some people find that a little bit strange but I think it really didn't sound real to me because I had only spoken to Mike literally five hours prior to that. Yes. My only question to them was “does Mike know?” because I was more concerned about how he felt when he learned what had happened. I felt like how he felt that moment when it happened bothered me more than the actual incident. Like was he scared? Was he afraid? Was he like - do you know what I mean? And I wasn't there. Was he alone? Like all these things.

AMT: They flew you to the hospital in Germany, did they?

LEAH CUFFE: They did.

AMT: And what do you remember when you got to that military hospital, what do you remember?

LEAH CUFFE: When I landed in Germany is when I realized just how real and how our lives were about to change. When I arrived there was a team of between 25 and 30 people waiting just for me. There were Mike's specialists, doctors, surgeons. There were psychologists, psychiatrists. There were all kinds of people ready to swarm me and sort of get me up to date and make sure that I was in a stable place.

AMT: And when did you see him, what was that like when you walked into his room?

LEAH CUFFE: I walked down this hallway with the padre because I had her escort me during my trip to Germany. We walked down this hallway and I describe it like the longest – the Forever Walk. It was the brightest widest hallway that you could ever ever imagine. And it seemed like it went on forever and ever. But I saw on the left hand side of the hallway, a Canadian flag and it was the only one. So I knew that that was Mike's room. And once I got to the door I stood outside for just a few minutes because I was trying to prepare myself. Even though they had already sort of given me the idea of what to expect when I do see him for the first time. And the padre I had offered to actually go in ahead of me just to make sure that you know Mike was awake that if he was covered up and all those sort of things and I told her no because I wanted to be the first person Mike saw.

AMT: Hmm.

LEAH CUFFE: Yes.

AMT: And what did you say to each other?

LEAH CUFFE: Well when I opened the door the first thing Mike said - he was awake and he looked at me and he said to me his exact words were “I am so sorry.”

AMT: How did you react to that?

LEAH CUFFE: I cried. Yes. And I just like - he just - he felt guilty. It bothered me that he felt guilty. It bothered me that he felt like he had to say he was sorry. He felt guilty because he felt like he had changed everything for us.

AMT: So, Mike.

MIKE TRAUNER: Ah hmm?

AMT: Why did you say that?

MIKE TRAUNER: Because they did feel guilty. You know I was just dealing with- Initially when the blast happened, my first reaction was you know what I'm going to tell my wife. I know our lives are going to change. And my other big fear too was, in case my driver was killed from the blast. I was worried about telling his family and his wife you know and those are the two things that kept crossing my mind. Even the first memory I have when I woke up in the hospital in Landstuhl, they just initially took me off life support and threatened to give me the feeding tube. And I'm like oh my god I'm going to die if they do that. So I tried eating at that time too. But that's the only thing when I remember actually remembering too “what am I going to tell my wife?”

AMT: You weren't married yet were you?

MIKE TRAUNER: No. We were not.

LEAH CUFFE: No.

AMT: But you were engaged. You were planning.

LEAH CUFFE: We were yes for after that deployment.

AMT: Medically they were doing all sorts of things for you there, Mike. When you got home what else did you have to go through?

MIKE TRAUNER: Well so far I've gone through 18 surgeries and 18 blood transfusions. You pretty much name it up. I've pretty much had it so the treatment still ongoing. It never ends. I can never actually give a definitive date when I can actually get off the medical system. It just is. It's always going to happen. I mean as soon as I got back I was initially right into physiotherapy and mental health. I went into an occupational therapist trying to get my fingers working again because all my fingers were completely seized. So it was a lot of work to actually reconstruct my hands and fingers.

AMT: And I'm guessing you were in a lot of pain through this.

MIKE TRAUNER: Oh yes. I cannot actually describe the pain.

AMT: And you know you're talking about the physical reality of that but then there's also the emotional psychological reality. You had two amputations, you're suffering severe injuries. How were you processing that?

MIKE TRAUNER: To this day like I tell everybody, I wake up in the morning, I see the war. Every time I go to bed I see the war. You know it doesn't go away there's nothing I could do about. I can't escape my past and it'll be with me until the day I die and that's just the way it is. So like my care will always be ongoing. Even mental health I've never really had the chance to deal with mental health. Everything is always just very physical for me. I had to deal with the amputations before I could deal with post-traumatic stress. I've only just recently started talking to somebody about post-traumatic stress disorder and you know with that comes sleep disorders and memory loss and all those other things.

AND: And Leah as all of this was going on, what's going on with you? How are the two of you are kind of working like a team already, aren’t you?

LEAH CUFFE: Were a pretty solid team. While this is all happening like Mike - I'd like to say Mike and I both spent 14 months in the Ottawa Rehabilitation Center before he was medically discharged to come home. During that time I discovered that our newly built home before he deployed was no longer going to be suitable for him. There was a split level home that he just couldn't live in or get in, for that matter. So during his 14 months on top of his recovery we started designing and planning a new barrier free home. And it was a full time job. Just being there you know because I was flossing his teeth for like four months. You know I helped him with all the personal stuff that he couldn't do anymore; shaving everything everything. His hands just didn't work. So…

AMT: What was that like for you, Leah?

LEAH CUFFE: You know I just I just did it. I just wanted to make it as easy for him as I possibly could. I didn't want him to see me stressed out either so I just you know, it just, it's our normal. We've just sort of come to terms with what's happened and accepted it the best that we can and we just kind of adapt and overcome each day because we still run into obstacles every single day.

AMT: And Mike for you to accept that kind of help was that difficult at first?

MIKE TRAUNER: It still is. It still is. Yes, you cannot actually get over it. I mean I wanted my wife to be my wife, you know, my partner and now she has to be this long term caregiver and I do feel guilt about that. I hate the idea I can't travel without her. I can't do a lot of things without her.

AMT: And somewhere in there you guys got married.

LEAH CUFFE: We did actually two years ago in June we ran away to Vegas [laughs].

AMT: Tell me more [laughs].

LEAH CUFFE: It's you know what? It's exactly what you would probably picture. It was a great day. We traveled to Vegas with two friends of ours and it was a great trip and our second last day in Vegas. We just kind of like “you know what? We're here, let's just do it.” So we did and it was it was amazing. It was so much fun.

AMT: You know you told me that he apologized to you and because everything had changed. Did either one of you ever have doubts then about your relationship after that?

LEAH CUFFE: God, Never.

MIKE TRAUNER: No. I never did.

LEAH CUFFE: Not for a second. Like it was full speed ahead like how can we do this? How can we do this together? Oh my gosh, never.

AMT: Mike How have the Invictus Games influenced your recovery?

MIKE TRAUNER: Pretty much every single aspect you could think of. I just came out of surgery with a major overhaul on my arm and leg. So I was having issues with my right leg initially. When I went to see my doctor they said: “Okay, you got two options. Number one is we take the leg altogether.” So I am thinking “well how much worse can I actually get from this point,” so which depressed me of course. What was the second option was. I still had good arteries and nerve endings and stuff in my right arm. So that was the second option was to take that tissue and attach it to my femoral artery in my right leg and attach the tissue at the bottom of my knee, and that would say my knee. So initially that's what I did and I was trapped in my house for about a year and a half. I couldn't leave. I was a complete prisoner. I wasn't exercising. I wasn't doing anything because I understand I just had an artery transferred and I was basically just put on bed rest for over a year. So I was kind of at a really low point at that time. And then the Invictus Games came up. And you know I've got a message that invited us to Toronto for the launch of the Invictus Games. When we got there and met the team, met Prince Harry and I was really inspired. So I joined the team and here I am.

AMT: So the first time you heard about them you weren't competing and you met the ones who were.

MIKE TRAUNER: Yes.

AMT: And you realized you could do that.

MIKE TRAUNER: I then realized I could do it. I was basically challenged to the team [chuckles].

AMT: Who did the challenging?

MIKE TRAUNER: Prince Harry himself did.

AMT: What did he say.

MIKE TRAUNER: He came up to me he asked me what was my story. So I told the story and I thanked him for his service and he says “no you know I'm doing this for you guys. The Invictus Games is all about you guys and one of my proudest moments is serving my country as a soldier and I just want to pass. I want to keep that tradition going. I basically still whole goal of the Invictus is to carry on outside, your injuries basically so.” And then I accepted his challenge to join the team and I shook his hand. And then our chief of defense staff also got up in front of the cameras and all these cameras panned and they turned and looked at me and I am like: “Uh oh, what's going on.” And he issued an ultimatum and challenged me to the point at me and he is like: “Master Corporal Mike Trauner, Mega Traun I challenge you to join the team for next year and hope to see you there” and I accepted his challenge. And we laughed and I pointed out to him and give him the thumbs up and that's kind of where my journey started.

AMT: So what's it like to train and push yourself like that now Mike?

MIKE TRAUNER: It's intense but you know what my job is infantry before so which was no easy task anyway.

AMT: So you're no slouch, you never were.

MIKE TRAUNER: No. You are not really allowed to be. So instead of doing 10-15 kilometer runs every single morning now I get to do that kind of stuff at my own pace. I have an elliptical I can use. I do my rolling and it's a different world for sure. I like training on my own.

AMT: Leah what changes have you seen him since he decided to compete in those games?

LEAH CUFFE: Like he's got a goal now he's got. He feels like part of a team again. The rest of the 89 athletes you know they've bonded quite a bit. Brothers, sisters in arms and again some of them still serving and some of them are retired but they get to represent the country again. Something Mike's always been proud to do and a huge change in Mike. You know his dark days of being stuck in the house for a year and a half you know have gone.

AMT: What's it done for you, Leah?

LEAH CUFFE: The same. Like seeing the change in him too. Like I'm so proud of him. He's worked very hard.

AMT: So when do you compete?

MIKE TRAUNER: 26th and 27th and my rowing and cycling kind of go together. So I go right from cycling to rowing and then the next day I have on the 27^th, in the morning I have cycling again so. So it'll be tiring. It'll be a long couple of days but I'm ready for it.

AMT: And so I think it's really important for us to hear all you've been through, and I'm wondering what you want other people to understand or even other military families to understand as they go through their own challenges.

MIKE TRAUNER: Being injured for such a long time since 2008, me and Lee have pretty much experienced every kind of degree of persons you can imagine from sickness to health and injury. So you know from the varying degrees I have met that have a sprained ankle and they just can't stop complaining about it. And on the other end of the spectrum I've met people that are severely ill and dying in the hospital and they never complain at all. I guess my message is you know we're all human. The best thing to do is try. I shouldn't be able to do most things that I do and I do them. So as long as you actually give it all a whole hearted attempt you really should give everything and life a go, a chance. And try to keep that negativity at your old head. Just keep pushing forward you know just keep positive and keep moving forward.

AMT: Well thank you for sharing your story and your optimism with us.

MIKE TRAUNER: Thanks so much.

LEAH CUFFE: Thank you for having us.

AMT: That is Mike Trauner and Leah Cuffe. They live in Pembroke, Ontario. And as Mike mentioned he is competing tomorrow and Wednesday in hand cycling and rowing at the Invictus Games underway in Toronto. Let us know what you think of what he had to say about adapting and how the two of them see the world. You can tweet us we are @TheCurrentCBC find us on Facebook go to our website cbc.ca/thecurrent, click on the Contact link. And stay with us. Coming up applying the tools of Aristotle and Plato to the here and now of 2017. We're getting into the issues of the day with philosopher Michael Sandel in just a few moments. I'm Anna Maria Tremonti. This is The Current on CBC Radio 1, Sirius XM, online on cbc.ca/thecurrent, on your podcast and on your radio app.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

'Create a national public discourse that is open': Harvard philosopher Michael Sandel

Guest: Michael Sandel

AMT: Hello I'm Anna Maria Tremonti and this is The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

Suppose you're the driver of a trolley car and your trolley car is hurtling down the track at 60 miles an hour. And at the end of the track you notice five workers working on the track. You try to stop but you can't. Your brakes don't work. You feel desperate because you know that if you crash into these five workers, they will all die. Let's assume you know that for sure. And so you feel helpless until you notice that there is, off to the right, a side track. And at the end of that track, there's one worker working on the track. Your steering wheel works. So you can turn the trolley car, if you want to, on the side track, killing the one but sparing the five. Here's our first question: What is the right thing to do?

AMT: So what would you do? And why? That's the kind of question philosopher Michael Sandel has posed to tens of thousands of curious students over the years. The Harvard philosopher is not just popular for his lectures on campus. Budding philosophers tune in to watch him online, on television, because he doesn't just have a gift for bringing the sometimes arcane and confusing problems of philosophy to life. He has a gift for connecting those problems to the real world in which we live. And that way of thinking can be a big asset, aow at a time when the world seems so volatile. Michael Sandel is in Toronto to give the annual LaFontaine Baldwin lecture which is part of the Six Degrees Citizen Space event created to talk about inclusion in Toronto that is underway. And he joins me in our Toronto studio. Welcome.

MICHAEL SANDEL: Great to be back. Thanks for having me.

AMT: It's nice to have you back in. So let's go to that trolley car scenario. What do you want us to think about when you ask what is the right thing to do?

MICHAEL SANDEL: Well in that case the trolley story is the way most people will answer that first question by saying Of course you turn because it's better to save five lives, even at the cost of sacrificing one. But then I offer a follow up case where it's not just a matter of turning onto a side track, but where to save the five you're standing on a bridge and you have to push someone onto the track to block that trolleys advance and that person will die. And very few people think that's the right thing to do. So the point of the story in the examples is to get people thinking about whether, well of course saving lives is morally important, but is morality only a matter of numbers. That's really the question and most people when tested will say “no numbers aren't the only thing that count.”

AMT: And then you move forward from there.

MICHAEL SANDEL: Yes.

AMT: So that's a hypothetical scenario that gets people thinking and talking.

MICHAEL SANDEL: Right.

AMT: Let's talk about something unfolding in real time.

MICHAEL SANDEL: All right. Could I add one thing about the practical relevance of this really hypothetical fantasy?

AMT: Absolutely. Go ahead .

MICHAEL SANDEL: The manufacturers of driverless cars have found that they have to program these cars to make ethical decisions. What if there are - Suppose there's a family of pedestrians crossing against the light in the crosswalk and your car can't break in time. Should it be programmed, the driverless car, to swerve even if it's into a concrete barrier that would kill the passenger? How should that driverless car be programmed to contend with this kind of ethical emergency? And so the trolley story, which I have in my book just has not been teaching about for many years other philosophers do as well, suddenly has new relevance to engineers for car companies designing these autonomous vehicles.

AMT: It's so interesting because when we put ourselves in there what would - it's one thing to talk about the trolley driver. It's one thing to say “but if it's us. If I'm in that car yes. How do I want them to program it for me? If I'm on that bridge yes, and suddenly it's my decision what do I do?”

MICHAEL SANDEL: Exactly. And if you were shopping for a frivolous car would you want to know how it had been programmed to make that decision? And would they sell many cars, I wonder, if they let it be known that the car would swerve and sacrifice the passenger to save the five pedestrians? It's just one small example of the way philosophers hypotheticals actually do bear in our everyday life.

AMT: Absolutely. Absolutely. So let's look at another case that's unfolding right now and how we should think about. I'm talking about the NFL. Yes the standing or not stand for the anthem and the back story that begins with Colin Kaepernick highlighting police brutality and racial injustice and then underlined by the US president who with many tweets, basically the accusation is he's disrespecting the flag, disrespecting the U.S. military. And all you have to do is look anywhere and you can see the great divide here.

MICHAEL SANDEL: Yes. And yesterday in the National Football League games a great many players did kneel during the national anthem and there were inevitably some in the stands who booed, others who cheered. This is an example sadly of Trump being Trump. I think to understand this one has to remember that Trump is conducting his presidency as a high profile reality TV show. And here he has he has failed to pass any significant legislation despite the fact that his party controls both houses of Congress. He's failed to pass health care. He has not built his wall with Mexico. He's certainly not gotten Mexico to agree to pay for the war. He's done none of these things. But he has an instinct for provocation and divisive provocation. It's not an accident that he first attacked the kneeling football players in a rally in Alabama. So there is also a racial tinge to this.

AMT: Even though he says I didn't talk about race.

MICHAEL SANDEL: Well that's part of making sure that people notice that race is entangled, to deny that he's talking about race. So he has a penchant - one could almost call it a dark genius - for changing the subject whenever the failures of his policies or his attempts to enact policies become evident. He changes the subject with headline catching, riveting, irresistible provocations like this one. And this morning he's tweeting again about how many people booed when players knelt he called on the owners to fire the players who knelt as a sign of protest against racial injustice. So it almost doesn't matter if the majority disagree with him as they do in this case according to opinion polls. He has a base of 35-38 %of ardent supporters. They're energized by this. And I think it helps them forget that, so far, he's not built a wall with Mexico.

AMT: You make the point that we need to have discourse on these big issues so that we can actually find a way to move forward. And we need to think about it. So what kinds of questions would you have each side ask in this case? To get away from Trump and look at the people who are so polarized by that. Because that what he leaves on the way, because he, Trump, goes on and tweets about other things.

MICHAEL SANDEL: Right. And tomorrow or next week it will be another provocative distraction. I think the first thing to do is to step away, step back from these riveting distractions and provocations. In fact part of what's striking and worrying is, even beyond Trump himself, is the inability - so far for the opposition, for Democrats, for people who are a troubled by Donald Trump in his politics - the inability to offer a compelling alternative. He manages to keep himself at the center of events. And I think this is because, I think he and his politics are a symptom for a hollowed out public discourse that we've had that's unfolded in recent decades. People are hungry for a public discourse that addresses big questions; questions about equality and inequality. What makes for a just society? What are we owe one another as citizens? There's very little reasoned discussion and debate in our public life about big questions of values. And so into that vacuum, rush not only Trump but in democracies around the world right wing nationalists populists who are filling an empty space. And I think that's what liberals and progressives and centrist parties need to recognize. They need to find a way to fill that empty space, to enrich public discourse. Otherwise the kind of xenophobic, nationalist, populists will really have to feel to themselves.

AMT: So how do you fill that empty space without just countering it with rhetoric from the other side that is as provocative?

MICHAEL SANDEL: I think by resisting the temptation simply to enter into a volley of provocation. It's that kind of volley that we find on Twitter. Twitter wars are rhetorical polemical volleys. What passes for public discourse these days too often is either narrow or managerial technocratic talk, and we've seen this from the so-called responsible parties over the last several decades. A kind of public discourse dominated by market thinking and market values and talk of the economy in fairly narrow terms. Or when passion enters we find these shouting matches and these polemical volleys. The alternative I think is to engage more directly with ethical questions, moral questions that people care about that have to do with our responsibility as citizens for one another, whether that particular issue is health care or tax policy or for that matter immigration. I think that progressive parties, centrist parties need to find a language, a moral language to address big questions in politics rather than to do as we've done in recent decades, essentially outsource public discourse to a kind of market reasoning and a kind of technocratic public talk.

AMT: So let's take another example. Let's look at refugees, immigration, the banning of certain people from countries, the suspicion of others. And you know we can look at the United States but we can look at the conversation going on in Canada as well. What are the questions we need to ask on that front, on the refugee front for example?

MICHAEL SANDEL: Well in the case of the refugees and immigration they overlap but they're somewhat different questions. Most people would recognize a moral imperative to look after refugees to the extent a country is capable of doing so. Canada has set a strong example in this regard that I wish we in the U.S. would learn from that. But what's been missing from public debate and has opened the way to a kind of strident nationalism, in the U.S. but also in many European countries, has been the refusal of the center right and center left parties to have a serious public discussion about immigration and therefore ultimately about citizenship. What do we do? Do we know more? Here's one question that that really doesn't get addressed. Do we owe more to our fellow citizens than to people, human beings throughout the world? Is there a special moral tie or tie of solidarity between Canadians in Toronto and Canadians in the Far West who have never met one another? But is there nonetheless a special tie a sense of obligation and if so what are the implications not only for the welfare state and for education, for health care and so on? What are the implications for fair trade policy, for immigration policy? There's an enormous backlash against a refusal even to take up this question. And so I think that should be one topic that is addressed seriously. What about patriotism? Patriotism often in public discourse becomes the monopoly of the right, sometimes the far right.

AMT: We are seeing this again and with the NFL, that discussion of patriotism comes into that discussion too.

MICHAEL SANDEL: Exactly. And we saw just yesterday in the elections in Germany. The far right nationalist party - though Angela Merkel was re-elected, the far right nationalist party got 13% of the vote - will have a substantial representation they'll be the third largest party in the Bundestag. We saw the anger in Britain that led to Brexit. We see the rise of these nationalist kind of ultranationalist xenophobic, often race baiting parties in Holland, in Poland and there's Marine Le Pen in France. So there is a swath of the electorate in democratic societies that feel left behind by the version of global capitalism that has unfolded in the last few decades. And the responsible parties are not addressing, they're not addressing the question of patriotism, belonging, citizenship. They are also failing to address the question of the rising inequality that has come with the version of global capitalism we've seen.

AMT: So how do you start some kind of discourse that that not only addresses that but allows people who are really on each side of the political spectrum to kind of find some even willingness to talk?

MICHAEL SANDEL: Part of the challenge is to create a national public discourse that is open to and welcoming of the moral convictions that citizens care about and bring to public life. There's a tendency in liberal societies to say “let's ask citizens to keep their morals to leave their moral and spiritual convictions outside when they enter the public realm.” There's a good reason for this impulse. In pluralist societies we disagree about hard moral questions and so we want to avoid conflict. We want to avoid the risk of imposing on the minority the values of the majority. That's an understandable instinct but it's gone together with - but the result has been to empty, to hollow out public discourse of moral meaning and to turn public discourse over essentially to market reasoning and market thinking which seems non-judgmental, which seems value neutral. And I think that's been the mistake of center right and center left parties, especially progressive parties. If you look to the real casualties of the populist backlash in democracies around the world. Now Canada is an exception here but the real casualties have been liberal or progressive or center left parties. The Democratic Party in the US, the Labor Party in Britain, the Social Democrats in Germany, the Socialist Party in France they have all suffered and been marginalized really because they've lost the ability to speak a rich moral language of citizenship, of solidarity. They've lost the ability to speak seriously about the deepening inequality and that's left the way open to these darker forces and this this hallowed public discourse.

AMT: So what questions do you think people need to ask themselves so that they can maybe look at where they have a gap with in thinking, and try to rethink where they might be able to see things differently?

MICHAEL SANDEL: I think it is not an individual endeavor. It has to be a collective endeavor. We have to create public places and common spaces in which this kind of public, richer public discourse can flourish.

AMT: So you're saying essentially we have to hear how other people think so that we can turn a lot of that over in our own hands, but we have to hear it out. We have to hear this beyond rhetoric.

MICHAEL SANDEL: Yes. Beyond rhetoric. And we can't just hope or expect that national political parties and political leaders will suddenly rejuvenate and reenergize public discourse. Wo we have to look to civil society. We have to look to schools and universities and programs of civic education that don't just teach about how government works but that equip young people to reason together and to argue together about big questions that matter. We also have to look to the media now. There are precious outposts like this program, Annamaria, like the CBC or in Britain the BBC. But these are vanishingly small percentage of what most of the public is exposed to for the most part. Profit driven media companies have an airing taste for sensation and for scandal and for shouting matches. And so we need to find in all democratic societies we need to find forms of the media that can encourage and promote a richer kind of public discourse. So civil society I think has to provide the seed bed for these spaces of richer public discourse. Then that will create pressure on national political leaders and politicians and political parties to elevate the terms of their public discourse.

AMT: Because when we look at this it is hard to push these conversations. What do people think they're risking when they engage in them?

MICHAEL SANDEL: I think they are risking having actually to think through what they believe and why. And there's a paradox because in many ways there's a great hunger. I find this wherever I go, in countries around the world. There's a great hunger to reason together in public about big moral questions that matter. And this hunger is not finding expression or a fulfillment either in the political life of most democratic societies, or in the educational systems, or in the media. So I think there is a risk. You mentioned what do people fear, what risk is involved, there is a risk. The risk is the risk of testing our beliefs, our convictions in a public space where people will disagree. But the reflex, the ability which has to be cultivated to reason together, to argue together, to learn how to listen to people with whom we disagree, these are these are our civic skills, habits. Tocqueville called them habits of the heart. These said the dispositions in the skills that make citizens citizens, and they're in disuse in our time. And I think people hunger for an opportunity to test their convictions in with their fellow citizens in reasoned sometimes passionate public discourse, but without the shouting matches, without the instability that we get from Twitter wars.

AMT: Do you see this with your students who are growing up in an age of the Twitter wars and everything else? Do you see that hunger for that real discussion, people looking each other in the eye?

MICHAEL SANDEL: Yes presence. Actual presence matters a lot especially at a time when so much communication even among friends is virtual. Now Facebook and Twitter and social media can be, and have in moments been, sources of civic gathering and awakening. But those moments tend to be fleeting if they aren't supplemented by actual human presence. And so I find two things among my students, one encouraging the other less so. What's encouraging is this persistent hunger to really engage in debate about big moral questions to figure out what we believe and why. The more worrisome trend is recently even in the classroom. I have to compete with all manner of digital devices and temptations whether cell phones or laptops laden with social media and who knows what else. And so I've actually banned electronic devices in my classes because teaching, especially on moral and civic questions, it demands attention. It demands presence. It demands a collective presence. That's the magic that happens when people in a classroom or in a town square engage with one another on big questions that matter. The magic depends on the presence and the attention and it's extremely difficult I find to compete with the blinking buzzing devices that would distract us from that presence.

AMT: Well we've been all ears today so thank you Michael Sandel.

MICHAEL SANDEL: Thank you.

AMT: Michael Sandel is a philosopher and a professor at Harvard University. He's in Toronto as part of the Six Degrees Citizen Space event underway in Toronto. That's our program for today stay with Radio One for Q. Tom Powers joined by actor and filmmaker Sarah Polley to talk about bringing Margaret Atwood's Alias Grace to life on the screen. As we leave we're going to circle back to that first clip about the out-of-control trolley. We just heard a little bit from Michael Sandel about how to think about it because most people would choose to change the trollies path killing one worker instead of five. But let's pick up on the second scenario and listen to Michael Sandel. I'm Anna Maria Tremonti. Thanks for listening to The Current.

SOUNDCLIP

This time you're not the driver of the trolley car you're an onlooker. You're standing on a bridge overlooking a trolley car track. And down the track comes a trolley car. At the end of the track or five workers. The brakes don't work. The trolley car is about to careen into the five and kill them and now you're not the driver. You really feel helpless until you notice. Standing next to you. Leaning over the bridge is a very fat man. And you could give him a shove. He would fall over the bridge onto the track, right in the way of the trolley car. He would die but he would spare the five. Now, how many would push the fat man over the bridge? Raise your hand.

[Laughter and chatter]

How many wouldn't? Most people wouldn't? Here's the obvious question. What became of the principal. Better to save five lives even if it means sacrificing one? What became of the principle that almost everyone endorsed in the first case?

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.

September 25, 2017 Full Episode Transcript

More Stories Like This