Moral Psychology
 

Great video the moral psychology of groups by Jonathan Haidt. Definitely worth the 18.5 minutes of viewing time.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/jo...oral_mind.html

Why is this political dissertation in the The Bear Pit, and not in the Soapbox?

It's about more than politics. He talks about how to better understand group dynamics. The 5 tenets he talks about transcend liberal and conservative views. He also talks about the danger of not being able to "think outside the box." Did you watch it?

Not open to new ideas Incarcerated? :p

My $.02
 

The TED site is generally fascinating stuff, IMHO Haight's observations and conclusions are subjective liberal observations based on shallow generalizations.

YMMV

I feel like I just crossed over with John Edwards....or getting Rich with Charles Givens

Interesting speaker though.

Personally I find that my Liberal Friends are far less open minded when it comes to listening to ideas from the other side of the fence....to be blunt the liberals when in mass behave more as a lynch mob from Westboro Baptist Church than open minded individuals.

He spoke too fast for me. My ears are grizzled! ;)

Pat

Fair enough.

I agree with Jonathan when he says most groups can get caught up in the mob mentality. I also think he spent a substantial period trying to warn his majority liberal audience of the danger of their mob mentality.

I laughed out loud :D Great film

I liked his goal of trying to reconcile the differences between liberals and conservatives. However I disagreed with him when he quoted Sent-ts'an and said that we must stop being "for" or "against" so that the truth can be clear. To me that philosophy self destructs. What is truth? What is morality? How can you have such concepts without being "for" some things and "against" others? It was almost as if he was saying that if we are to reach agreement on what is moral, we must eliminate "right" (for) and "wrong" (against). But if "right" and "wrong" disappear, then our goal reaching moral agreement becomes moot. He takes a very relativistic approach to morality, and in my opinion, morality ceases to make sense under such a worldview. That doesn't mean that this guy is immoral or amoral because of his beliefs. I just disagree with his theory. He was very interesting though, and I am glad that he is searching for solutions to problems like these.
:munchin

Nothing new about it. Sounds like any one of my Skinnerian college profs from the ‘70s. While it may be about more than politics, it is not much more than political psychology.
Concur with AKV’s assessment.

Concur completely.............;)

Big Teddy :munchin

Generalization I think is an understatement, I can't watch the news without someone crying out racism towards the right when it comes to issues, kinda weak if you ask me. I'm not much into politics/economics because I just haven't educated myself much into it, but I believe I lean more towards the right on most issues, I'm very pro-military and constitutional. I believe in using what works I guess, the new idea of spending hasen't worked out so well. What I've observed is that the left appeals to environmentalists and those financially "disadvantaged" if thats the word for it. Take Obama for example, promised clean energy jobs to reduce pollution and help with unemployment, doesn't sound bad at all to me until word goes around he is gonna raise the energy bill to force the clean energy movement to happen, he also pretty much promised to give all us poor people a bunch of money. In the beginning he even promised to solve to immigration problem, appealing to many other leftists who typically favor immigration. All at the same time, leftist media makes everyone who disagrees a bunch of backward and racist citizens *mob mentality*. And this is just my $.02, but it looks like assault, media style for lack of better words at the moment. I think a person true to morals is gonna consider both points of view, not be 100% right or left, a think an example would be: I'm in favor of tighter boarder patrol because I'm tired of drug problems coming from Mexico to my city, but I still believe in allowing immigrants in, as long as they work hard to become Americans and pay their taxes.

Yes, oversimplification is an understatement. I'm sure he does well with the average crowd, as most are too stupid to do their own thinking.

trvlr, Jonathan Haidt talk doesn't transcend any of the issues, he merely frames them in a manner that most non-thinkers can understand.

Charisma, it's how the "one" made it into office, how Bob Jones got 1000+ to drink the kool-aid, and how "oprah" made a billion dollars.

Charisma + stupid people =$$$ and power.


The individuals that actually change/shape our world envision flight, organ transplanting, send information over waves of energy, putting men on the moon, splitting atoms, curing disease's etc.

If you want out of the box thinking watch Star-Trek.;)

Team Sergeant