tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post3868944345116130439..comments2024-03-14T11:09:32.759-05:00Comments on Falkenblog: Haidt on Moral ValuesEric Falkensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-41634265429450668192012-03-24T14:17:32.894-05:002012-03-24T14:17:32.894-05:00I think the author of the book, our good host, and...I think the author of the book, our good host, and some of the commenters above all suffer from too US-centric a view. The subject matter touches human universals. The conservative/progressive dichotomy can be observed in most polities throughout history and geographies. The narrow tribalism of focusing on the contemporary US specimen makes you lose analytical power: transient idiosyncrasies of the specimen are turned into generalities that really aren't general. This is true in the time dimension as well: I'm sure some aspects of the current US left would be disowned by the US left of a few decades ago and may be disowned by the US left a few decades in the future.<br /><br />Affirmative action is perhaps a good example: the wider left is deeply divided on the subject, both on practical and purely moral grounds, and I think in due time the pro side will eventually lose as the moral arguments sink in and evidence the policy does more harm than good in practice becomes sufficiently overwhelming.<br /><br />I wouldn't be so pessimistic about the internet's role in just reinforcing existing opinion. The problem existed in the analog era as well: the left/right wingers would read left/right papers, buy books from left/right book stores, and exchange views with their friends of the same persuasion. It's actually easier for a google search to stumble on the opposition's view, even when looking for confirmation, so anyone with a modicum of open mindedness has a good chance to get to know the other side. The granularity of online media helps as well: I can follow this blog now, without being exposed to all the crud it would have been bundled with in analog format: it would probably be a column in a conservative paper packaged with a lot of uninteresting partisan crud, and I would never have been through the hoops of getting that whole paper just to access one columnist.cighttp://commentisglee.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-11314381156056148222012-03-20T21:08:07.413-05:002012-03-20T21:08:07.413-05:00I guess that from the point of view of each side i...I guess that from the point of view of each side in the dispute, all differences in opinion are just factual. everybody has good intentions, and believes his side of the argument to be rational. clearly it's only about the facts, and the other side got them all wrong.<br /><br />only to a hypothetical independent observer, conservatives and liberals look as if they tend to give more weight to different types of "factual beliefs". let's take an example - the occupy movement. I am one of those opposing it. I have come to disagree with any kind of heroic struggle for freedom if it happens under a democracy and it involves street protests that are meant to obstruct others in any way. you can just speak your mind pretty much anywhere and vote for what you think is right. there is no justification for physically "occupying" anything and shouting out loud that you are the 99%. you already have all the means to prove that you really are the 99% - just vote, and we'll all have to live with the outcome.<br /><br />to me, of course, this looks rational and "factual", leading to the greater good for the greatest number of people, yet to an independent observer it may well look like I value "respect for authority" a lot more than a liberal does, and have a lot less "copmpassion".<br /><br />btw I also like the book. ended up reading it because I read the happiness hypothesis, which in turn I read because I found the review on your blog. so thanks for that!B. A.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-80418707961797218972012-03-20T17:33:49.063-05:002012-03-20T17:33:49.063-05:00I have to echo that last point. This, to me, is t...I have to echo that last point. This, to me, is the biggest disconnect in how the left sees itself. Your typical NYT reader truly believes that "the Man" (i.e. corporations) is fully and totally in charge of all systems of power, and that the forces of good are simply striking a blow against this leviathan of authority. The idea that the NYT itself, Harvard or the Ford Foundation constitute any kind of 'authority' at all strikes them as ludicrous. Yet they treat a missive from Paul Krugman with all the sanctity of an encyclical.<br /><br />I love what little I've read of Haidt, but the idea that the left is generally anti-authority is just wrong.chuchonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-3658121980574155922012-03-20T15:19:53.925-05:002012-03-20T15:19:53.925-05:00The default settings for human values can be descr...The default settings for human values can be described in far more basic terms - something like: personal, social, magical and religious. Having and valuing a scientific mindset is a fairly recent development and doesn’t always provide the escape velocity from the later two settings that so many people like to think it does.<br /><br />“Conservative” and “liberal” are relative terms - it matters what you’re trying to conserve or be liberal about. To the extent that contemporary conservatism is synonymous with 18th century classical liberalism (if only!) I would say that it can be boiled down to the primacy of the individual and an acceptance of human nature (as outlined above) whereas contemporary liberalism seeks to subordinate the individual, eliminate individual human judgment as much as possible and circumvent human nature by contriving a “New Man” or utopia in one way or another. <br /><br />The assertion that contemporary liberals place authority near the bottom of the value hierarchy is absurd. The farther to the left you go to the left these days the more exacting the strictures are for what to eat, how to speak, what to drive, what light bulb to use…along with endless appeals to appoint “experts” to positions supervising all areas of your life.Mercurynoreply@blogger.com