What is more important; what you think or how you think?
When you ask someone, "What do you think about (enter subject)?", you will always get an answer. You may or may not like the answer that you get, but you will always get some kind of answer. In almost all cases, the answer that you will receive is based upon the most recent information that the respondent has received that is in agreement with his underlying philosophical biases. An interesting experiment for you to conduct is to rather ask someone, "How do you think about (enter subject)?" You will probably have to explain what you mean by the question, but it may produce some interesting responses.
There have been several articles published recently that approach the important question of which is more important; what you think or how you think. It would be wise for you to consider the question in regard to your own positions on the important issues of today, as well as how you approach discussions with others that may not believe as you do about those same issues.
The March 2017 issue of Imprimis contains an article entitled "How to Think About Vladimir Putin" by Christopher Caldwell, the Senior Editor of The Weekly Standard. In this article, Mr. Caldwell shares his views on the importance of considering the nature and actions of Vladimir Putin in light of his position as the successful and popular leader of Russia, rather than the enemy of the United States. By doing so, one is able to see Putin, not as an enemy to be hated, but to see Putin as a leader who is to be admired for his passion and commitment to his country.
While this approach to Putin should not be used to change our strategic actions regarding Vladimir Putin, it should be used to consider the motivation behind the actions of Russia on the world stage. For example, are Russia's actions in Syria strictly offensive actions intended to destabilize the region, or are they actions being employed to defend Russian sovereignty, cultural integrity, and economic stability? The actions themselves may be indefensible, but in understanding the motivations, it may be possible to more effectively respond to those actions without escalation of tensions in the region.
The suggestion here is not that Putin's actions are justifiable, defensible, or rational. The suggestion here is that there are motivations that drive his actions, and that understanding those motivations may help to better understand those actions.
In a slightly more philosophical article, Dr. Ryan Anderson, Senior Research Fellow in American Principles and Public Policy with the Heritage Foundation, writes about the role of Natural Law and how conservative principles based on natural law support social justice. While this is not typically what a conservative thinks about social justice, it does support how conservative principles based on natural law do support social justice, albeit not with the same understanding promoted by progressives.
Dr. Anderson says, "The deepest crisis of liberty in the West is a crisis or moral freedom. Freedom today is understood as a matter of indifference – a freedom from constraint. But freedom rightly understood is a freedom for – a freedom for excellence." The motivational drive for freedom FOR excellence is built upon the foundation of the divine example of morality: God has created us, and expects us to serve Him, to serve the family structure that he has created, and to serve the society of families that we create. When spiritual morality is replaced with moral relativism, as we see all too often in the West, then the drive for excellence and service is replaced by self-absorption, complacency, and a belief that the government will take care of all of the needs to service our society. "If we do not have God for a Father, we will not see our fellow man as our brother. If we are not made in the image and likeness of God, we will not treat every life as created equal and endowed with unalienable rights – indeed, we will view our neighbors as random, meaningless cosmic dust that gets in our way."
In closing, let me offer this quote from Dr. Anderson;
Our mistakes take place when we forget that we are simultaneously dependent and rational and animal; when we reduce ourselves merely to the level of animal and embrace a crude materialism; when we deny that reason can know truth and embrace skepticism; when we refuse to embrace our dependency under the illusion of a false sense of self-sufficiency and individualism or when we locate our dependency primarily on government rather than on family and friends and markets and God; when we propose that the government should provide for all our physical needs and that our culture should encourage us to act on our every animal instinct.