Comment

Head and Heart: Are Conservatives More Moral?

2
lostlakehiker10/15/2012 7:58:09 am PDT

re: #1 Romantic Heretic

First of all, define morality. Only then can it be determined who is more ‘moral’. The authour of the book reviewed in the article defined it in his way and it struck me as trying to apply scientific categories to a field where such a mode of thinking is both limiting and harmful.

I just re-read the article, and Christ, talk about confirmation bias. The book authour’s statement: “Conservatives understand moral psychology, Democrats don’t” is a pile of stinking horseshit that as John Galbraith notes is, “Conservatives looking for a high moral reason for being selfish.”

Bite me, Jonathan Haidt.

Jonathan Haidt is a scientist. You, on the other hand, are a denialist. Oh, yes, there is more science than the science of global warming, and where there is science, there is heated denial.

“Moral psychology” does not mean the psychology of doing what is in fact moral. It means the science of how people in fact think about morality. Haidt has done all sorts of work in this field. Careful field work, careful statistical analysis, and so on. He’s a giant in his field.

He wrote his book with the express purpose of explaining to liberals how and why their message wasn’t getting through, and how better to appeal to that fraction of the population that gives more weight to factors that liberals deem morally irrelevant.

He’s a liberal who’s frustrated by liberal inability to work the levers of persuasion.

And your answer to his attempt to help you understand and win arguments about morality? Crude derision.