I have been puzzling for quite while about what separates us into political factions during this country and what to try to to about it. My spouse found this book and suggested it to me. it's not a whimsical book. it's well researched and documented. i might suggest reading it in small segments and taking time to digest what you've got read. There are 376 pages within the text and 114 pages of notes and references. i can not do justice to the entire book during a review but will provide you with a number of the highlights.
Haidt sees attribute as "moralistic, critical and judgmental." We commonly see ourselves as reaching a conclusion in various ways then developing feelings about our beliefs. He concludes from his and others' research that we've this backwards. We first develop an opinion through intuition and knowledge then search ways to justify what we feel/think.
He presents five moral foundations upon which we base our perceptions of ourselves, one another and therefore the world. First is that the dimension of care/harm during which we glance out for the vulnerable among us. Second is fairness/cheating with liberals more concerned about equality and conservatives more concerned about proportionality (getting what you deserve). Third is loyalty/betrayal which involves cohesive coalitions and threats to your group. Fourth is authority/subversion or responsibility for order and justice. Fifth and last is sanctity/degradation, concerned with the noble and pure aspects of society. Liberals tend to be most concerned about the primary two foundations while conservatives are generally concerned about all five.
These moral foundations form the idea of ideologies which bind together various societal groups. Conservatives tend to think that rules and constraints are necessary to stop people from working on their base instincts. Liberals tend to think that constraints are seen as chains which must be broken to "free the noble aspirations" of individuals .
The author agrees with the philosopher John Stuart Mill that input from each side are necessary to take care of a healthy political balance. the matter is that each side became entrenched and see one another because the enemy and as destructive to their views also on our society.
While not a main focus of the book, Haidt does suggest some ways to urge past this impasse. He suggests that each side got to form "more positive social connections" with one another . each side got to find out how to concentrate to every other without arguing or raging. we'd like to carry off discussing our differences until we will hear what's important to the opposite side and have established trust. He also sees the necessity to vary our "election procedures, institutions and environments" which all contribute to our standoff.
He doesn't enter great detail about any of the needed changes on the other hand he didn't present this as a goal of his book. i feel he gives us plenty to believe on the thanks to understanding and hearing one another . The specifics of the way to work together got to come from shared good intentions and understanding of both groups toward one another . In my opinion, nobody will win a war between cultural and political groups. Instead our culture as an entire is ravaged by the conflict. Our future depends on finding ways to create on shared motives and goals while respecting the differences which remain inherent in our groups.
0 Comments