Today, I had Josh participate in a critical thinking exercise by making him write for about 3-4 minutes on topics like the death penalty, assisted suicide, obesity, Obamacare, homosexuality, etc. Afterwards, I had Josh read his responses to me, and I had him consider some of the gaps in his reasoning. For example, I had him provide a concrete, explicit measure for how assisted suicide was different from Hitler's euthenasia program, which essentially "mercy-killed" people who were deemed old, disabled, sickly, etc. The point was not to prove one point-of-view right and the other wrong, but to help Josh qualify his arguments, noting that sometimes disparate ideas can stem from the same basic concept.