The Moral Roots Of Liberals And Conservatives
Jonathan Haidt gives an interesting talk on TED where he eloquently discusses the origin of differences between the conservatives and the liberals. He mentions that being open to new experiences is the key to noting these divisions. Liberals crave new ideas, novelty, and travel while conservatives are full of routine, order, dependability, and are low on openness to new experiences.
We are trapped in our own ways of thinking, notes Haidt; we are much like the movie "The Matrix" such as when the liberals lost in 2000 elections, they felt that all the red states should form their country. However, nature have offered an initial draft for our minds (which are independent of experience) even before we were born, which can be changed during our lifetime. He offers the five categories that define moral dimensions, three of which are heavily entwined with the social capital. The five core dimensions are abstracts from the neurology, anthropology, and psychology. They include harm/care as any other species shows compassion to one of its kind, fairness or reciprocity, in-group or out-group, a trait common to humans who join each other to form large groups for a common goal, providing reinforcement in wars, sport teams or for loyalty, authority or respect, which are mainly based on love, and purity or sanctity with regard to food, sex, or other body desires.
By describing the experiment performed by Fehr and Gachter written up in Nature in 2002, he describes the liberals’ "paradise" as playing the game with no forms of punishment, allowed with corporation starting at the moderate level before declining with each round. He believes that the religion plays a role in our moral toolkit which requires organizational tools, sub-groups, and moral incentives to say “no” to the worst voices and rise to our best. I came from a country where tribal law supersedes government authority; my ingroup morality channel in my head...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document