Conservative vs Liberal morality models - researcher says cons more moral

[Bill]

I thought this was a very interesting subject, quite thought provoking.

================================================== ===

BLVR: Let’s continue with this culture war discussion. You tend to sound quite pessimistic about the state of affairs in America. What are the prospects of discussion between conservatives and liberals, given that conservatives make use of two modules—purity and hierarchy—that we liberals care little about? Are we speaking different languages? How can we get past this?

JH: First, it would help if liberals understood conservatives better. If I have a mission in life, it is to convince people that everyone is morally motivated—everyone except for psychopaths. Everyone else is morally motivated. Liberals need to understand that conservatives are motivated by more than greed and hatred. And Americans and George Bush in particular need to understand that even terrorists are pursuing moral goods. One of the most psychologically stupid things anyone ever said is that the 9/11 terrorists did this because they hate our freedom. That’s just idiotic. Nobody says: “They’re free over there. I hate that. I want to kill them.” They did this because they hate us, they’re angry at us for many reasons, and terrorism and violence are “moral” actions, by which I don’t mean morally right, I mean morally motivated.

BLVR: And at the same time you want liberals to understand that we didn’t go into Iraq just for oil or Halliburton.

JH: Of course not. Bush is Manichean. He really believes that we are in a battle of good vs. evil. Now I think strategically that he led us into disaster. But I never believed for a moment that this was about oil.

BLVR: As an aside, I completely agree with you on this. Being in an academic environment, I’m very frustrated with how people view conservatives—as moral monsters whose only goal is to pursue evil. It’s a little like the prochoice, prolife debate, where the prochoice faction looks at the other side as though all they want to do is oppress women—

JH: Exactly, exactly. That’s the press secretary at work; that’s what he does. The press secretary doesn’t just explain your actions in the best light. He strips away any possible moral motivation for the opponent. It’s the same thing. Liberals want to understand conservatives as motivated only by greed and racism. They think that conservatives just want to hurt minorities and get money. And that completely misses the point.

http://www.believermag.com/issues/200508/?read=interview_haidt

================================================== ===

I watched this whole video:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/video/conference/2007/haidt

in which this guy Haidt says liberals have a moral system based mostly on "harm" and "fairness" principles, while conservatives have a richer moral system that includes "heirarchy" and "purity" principles.

Leading to situations like the gay marriage debate - liberals see gay marraige as a harm and fairness issue - is it right to deny 5 percent of the poplation happiness just to satisfy the purity concerns of the conservatives - while the conservatives see gay marriage as causing harm to their purity, and see that as a greater harm than demeaning the 5% of impure gays.

It's really a fascinating topic.

[Bill]

Oh, btw, I think anybody who thinks we attacked Iraq for manichean reasons, and not the oil, is a certifiable freekin IDIOT.

I can believe Bush is a manichean. But Bush is a figurehead, a puppet of the real powers that control our government, which are the people whose money controls elections, and whose lobbyists control legislation and politicians.

[moonman]

I don't buy it Bill. I really think calling the current Republican party 'conservative' is a case of mistaken identity. The Republicans abandonned conservative principles with the advent of the Reagan Revolution.

When was the last time you heard a Republican advocating the conservative principle of a balanced budget? Would a genuine conservative disrespect the concept of innocent until proven guilty so much as to support asset forfeiture on a mere allegation?

The coaliton of corpratists and religious right merely gives the appearance of purity. By every measure of so-called family values, divorce rates, abortion, dysfunctional families etc. incidents of same are higher in the Red States than in the Blue.

The fact that our political discourse is poisonned is because the corpratists have manipulated the religious right into believing we liberals are amoral at best and absent morals at worst. Not that those in Red States are moral by any measure of family values. They only talk it up. They don't walk their talk.

Our current political discourse is not occuring among traditional liberals and conservatives. Our current debate is among liberals and fascists disguising themselves as conservatives.

[Bill]

Well, I don't think the theory says anything about wether or not conservatives are actually conservative - the researcher is using self-identification in testing as the standard, and the two terms, liberal and conservative, have become political labels of social movements, not statements of actual political theories.

So, when "conservatives" test as using five principles of morality, as opposed to the "liberals" two, what we are talking about is self identification.

That means that the people who think of themselves as conservatives, irrepesctive of what "conservativism" actually means, process their morality thru five 'modules' or principles - especially thru three principles which the reserachers called "authority/respect", "loyalty/ingroup", and "purity/sanctity".

My title, meant to be somewhat provacative, says that conservatives are more moral - what I meant was that conservatives add three moral axis to the liberals tested tendency to judge things only by harm and fairness. This could be a disadvantage to "conservatives" in a planet that is increasingly more complex, and may explain why they want to kill the "other" so badly.

As the author says - " For example, we academics have extremely fine-tuned receptors for sexism (related to fairness) but not sacrilege (related to purity). ".

As a practical matter, conservatives are easily offended by perceived threats to their purity - as an example, we had a case like that here recently, where one person was either really offended, or pretended to be offended, by a religious taunt about pedophilia among priests and ministers.

[Linkster]

This statement should have put an end to the discussion:
"If I have a mission in life, it is to convince people that everyone is morally motivated—everyone except for psychopaths"
Labelling anyone that is not morally motivated as a psychopath is like saying that every jew is a criminal - I think Hitler used that as an excuse to get rid of a few million of his distractors

Some intelligent people over history have made the point that morality is an excuse or deflection of existence - I would have to quote someone else as they probably put it best:

To live, man must hold three things as the ruling values of his life: Reason—Purpose—Self-esteem. Reason, as his only tool of knowledge—Purpose, as his choice of the happiness which that tool must proceed to achieve—Self-esteem, as his inviolate certainty that his mind is competent to think and his person is worthy of happiness, which means: worthy of living. These three values imply and require all of man's virtues
A person's own life and happiness is the ultimate good. To achieve happiness requires a morality of rational selfishness, one that does not give undeserved rewards to others and that does not ask them for oneself.


In case youre unfamiliar with it - her name is Ayn Rand

[Jesse Hemingway]

Just hope you do not run out of toilet paper.

[disrupter]

so-called conservatives have child-parent mentalities.
The most foolish people are the ones who think there is some 'superior' mentality of 'adult' rather than simply more experienced children.

That is why they are so easily deceived.
They are the pawns of liars & cheats, because they think there is some simplistic bifurcation between good & bad people.

They fail to recognize that people fill an entire spectrum & shift along that spectrum. No one is 'certified' permanently 'good'. Real Adults [experienced children] know you have to intermittently check up on EVERYONE to verify that they are holding true to their words.

most people who call themselves conservatives think people are cartoons rather than real living, breathing, complex beings.

Most people who claim to be conservative are really just childish idiots, who don't have the capacity to handle complexity & ambiguity.

People who just aren't ready to handle reality,
so they revert to religious fantasyland.

[moonman]

Well, I don't think the theory says anything about wether or not conservatives are actually conservative - the researcher is using self-identification in testing as the standard, and the two terms, liberal and conservative, have become political labels of social movements, not statements of actual political theories.

So, when "conservatives" test as using five principles of morality, as opposed to the "liberals" two, what we are talking about is self identification.

That means that the people who think of themselves as conservatives, irrepesctive of what "conservativism" actually means, process their morality thru five 'modules' or principles - especially thru three principles which the reserachers called "authority/respect", "loyalty/ingroup", and "purity/sanctity".

My title, meant to be somewhat provacative, says that conservatives are more moral - what I meant was that conservatives add three moral axis to the liberals tested tendency to judge things only by harm and fairness. This could be a disadvantage to "conservatives" in a planet that is increasingly more complex, and may explain why they want to kill the "other" so badly.

As the author says - " For example, we academics have extremely fine-tuned receptors for sexism (related to fairness) but not sacrilege (related to purity). ".

As a practical matter, conservatives are easily offended by perceived threats to their purity - as an example, we had a case like that here recently, where one person was either really offended, or pretended to be offended, by a religious taunt about pedophilia among priests and ministers.

Bill, the point I am making is that those who decalre themselves as conservatives in this political climate are delusional. There is no one party or person advocating traditional conservative values. Conservatism doesn't exist.

What does exist is fascism disguised as conservatism.

[Bill]

Bill, the point I am making is that those who decalre themselves as conservatives in this political climate are delusional. There is no one party or person advocating traditional conservative values. Conservatism doesn't exist.

What does exist is fascism disguised as conservatism.

That may be true, however, diagnosing things that way doesn't help solve the political problems the whole country faces.

Unless you are proposing lining up the fascists and shooting them, or putting them in camps, which would be a heck of a job, considering that we are talking about some 50-70 million plus people.

I'm saying we will need to address these cognitive and neurological and cultural differences in morality contruction in order to acheive some kind of long term democratic solution to this political impasse.

This is especially important when we consider the functions of the three "Community binding" morality principles that "conservatives" (fascists) use.

Obedience to authority, loyalty to the group, and purity obsessions are nearly perfect tools for creating a powerful political unity - which is what they have done, nearly destroying the nation, and despoiling the constitution in the process.

This is a frighteningly powerful social adaptation.

And, the conservative/fascists are only going to become more powerful. They have huge families, and publicly say they are going to outbreed liberals, which is a very effective strategy in a democratic society.

And, as our economy collapses and the oil becomes hugely more expensive, the harshness of future american life will make conservative-fascism all the more attractive.

This has always happened in the past - hard times have been a breeding ground for violent fascist movements.

I'm suggesting we desperately need to understand their psychology. They won't care about understanding ours - all they want to do is kill us or put us in camps.

We're the only ones smart enough to try to think our way out of this trap.

[Bill]

One of the things I've learned, studying "conservatives" posting here and in other places around the net, is that they are _trapped_ in their worldview - they are not really capable of flexible thinking, they can't put themselves into other peoples shoes, and they can't think their way out of the trap they've gotten stuck in.

This is really so dramatically clear here at this board - study the rhetoric and the idea sets and the words they are using, and I think the principle I'm suggesting is crystal clear.

They are trapped, but that mental trap has deadly consequences for all of us.

We're in the position of trying to rescue ourselves from danger, while stuck in close proximity to paniced, desperately struggling, and fearfully violent "conservatives" - and there are millions and millions of them.

We have to understand them, if we are to save ourselves.

[moonman]

I agree with you Bill. It's just that I'm not hopeful. We've lost the Courts for the next 20-25 years. We've lost the process per Florida in 2000 and Ohio in '04.

Can we win their hearts and minds back? If so, how? I'm a liberal because when I studied the U.S. Constitution I saw a document, a framework that was all about fairness. Checks and balances are about fairness. Our adversary system of law is designed to achieve fairness in the process. But that's just me, eh.

Sadly, I think our flirtation with fascism will have to play itself out in full bloom in order that our very young nation learn from it.