Interesting psychology article on liberals and conservatives

[Allen773]

http://edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt08/haidt08_index.html

----

Any thoughts?

[Newtons Bit]

1. You should review your membership agreement.

[Whiplash]

Why did you mischaracterize the subject of this matierial? It's clearly an attack on Conservatism and the thinking that leads to supporting it. It's even called "what makes people vote Republican?" and starts out with all kinds of stuff about how they were abused and mistreated and it causes them to hate liberty and freedom and other BS.

This is by no means a psychological review of both liberals and conservatives. It's a hit piece on Conservatives that uses many stramans.

[Allen773]

Why did you mischaracterize the subject of this matierial? It's clearly an attack on Conservatism and the thinking that leads to supporting it. It's even called "what makes people vote Republican?" and starts out with all kinds of stuff about how they were abused and mistreated and it causes them to hate liberty and freedom and other BS.

This is by no means a psychological review of both liberals and conservatives. It's a hit piece on Conservatives that uses many stramans.
I thought it was rather fair, even though it's written from a liberal standpoint.

We are clearly on different wavelengths.

[Tsukasa Buddha]

tl;dr

[mrbaracuda]

BS.

Aaand that sums it up. I didn't even want to further at a certain, very early point. ;)

We are clearly on different wavelengths.

More like on different planets.

[Allen773]

Aaand that sums it up. I didn't even want to further at a certain, very early point. ;)



More like on different planets.
So why are you guys conservative? I'm anxious to hear. Seriously.

[mrbaracuda]

Because when Tsukasa Buddha votes Democrats, there's just got to be something wrong with them! :D

[Cain]

I remember seeing this guy on Bloggingheads.tv. It's a good article -- just keep in mind he's transitioned from "morality" as defined by the philosopher to a morality of an anthropologist. I suppose conservatives on this forum object to his framing because "profane" is associated with liberalism, religion/"sacred" with conservatism and our values are the inverse of society in general (profane, good; sacred, bad). Of course, I can only guess because there has been no substantive criticism.

hestarts out with all kinds of stuff about how they were abused and mistreated and it causes them to hate liberty and freedom and other BS.

Can you quote that part for me? How does "partially heritable personality trait" comport with "abused" and "mistreated"? It seems as though you're trying very hard to confirm standard stereotypes.

Anyway, Haidt writes:
Most Democrats don't understand that politics is more like religion than it is like shopping.

That's an indictment against Democrats. Too often Democrats have a customer service (pandering) orientation to the public. "Oh, you want drilling. OK, we're also in favor of drilling!" Leadership is about staking out positions, and persuading others to your view. If you honestly feel drilling is good policy, then that's a different matter. It's perfectly sensible to revise one's views, provided one is compelled by the evidence rather than what people claim to want.

This is exactly why I disagree with his prescriptions. Instead of repackaging one's beliefs in order to appeal to their more brutish sentiments -- hierarchy, "purity", in-group loyalty -- we should be making a case to undermine those false values.

[INRM]

The first couple of sentences do kind of suggest the appearance of saying "Conservatives are mentally defective".


INRM