Automoderated users, Autopatrolled users, Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, Confirmed users, Forum administrators, Interface administrators, Moderators, Rollbackers, Administrators
117,168
edits
Blue and Orange Morality: Difference between revisions
m
punctuation fix
Jason taylor (talk | contribs) |
Looney Toons (talk | contribs) m (punctuation fix) |
||
Line 513:
* Jonathan Haidt's observations, which became the basis of ''The Righteous Mind'', highlighted this. In essence, there are moral foundations that can be classified under broad categories like care, fairness, liberty, loyalty, authority and sanctity. He asserts that not only do these impact one's individual moral framework, but that these can also lead to wildly differing views, beliefs, ideologies, etc. based on what foundations take precedence. As a consequence, this can help explain why Right and Left-leaning people can view the same thing in incredibly varied interpretations and why it's difficult for human beings to talk on the same page.
* Libertarians insist they do not fall under the traditional "right vs. left" scale or, if they do, it's secondary to their primary philosophy. The introduction of a libertarian vs. authoritarian axis has generally been accepted among those that try to quantify political views.
* Extremist groups can have an interesting variation of this. What is striking is not so much that the morality is ''alien'' but rather that it is off center. A typical thing might be to praise heroism, loyalty and other things that everyone (including their enemies) would praise but it will come out in a weird sort of way, so that their ability to commit atrocities "proves" their devotion. For instance both Himmler and Raoul Wallenberg would certainly have approved of being self-sacrificing and loyal to a cause. And both would have had [[Understatement|somewhat differing ideas]] as to what that meant.
{{reflist}}
| |||