Jonathan Haidt: The moral roots of liberals and conservatives

SSgt Christopher Brose I think you and I are on the same page. I also see a modern day reversal of those purporting to be "liberal" while advocating for laws dictating morality and stifling free speech to avoid diverse thought. I am a conservative also who does not follow any organized religion, but can draw from several to form a well rounded position of a moral guide. I also see a convergence of beliefs within the left which is utterly terrifying; doublethink and newspeak were never supposed to be deployed in reality while they, the "progressive" left, become violently dogmatic in their beliefs.

As I've stated before, I believe the classical liberal is gone and those that self describe as liberal do not understand nor have never been taught the real meaning of liberalism.

Merriam-Webster
Liberalism
noun lib·er·al·ism \ˈli-b(ə-)rə-ˌli-zəm\
2.) a often capitalized: a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity
b: a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard
c: a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy (see autonomy 2) of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties; specifically : such a philosophy that considers government as a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities (such as those involving race, gender, or class)

Disagreement on basic definitions and meanings certainly could be a contributing factor, those labels are often applied by others, so the fault is not entirely on whomever is being labeled. Any label, however, is too simplistic to define an individual entirely, which I feel is a central point of the talk, and one that you illustrate yourself. Labels are for the convenience of the labeler.
I also see attempting to put the entirety of the problem on one side as employing several points of cognitive dissonance. For example, I would say advocating for laws dictating morality while stifling free speech is something that conservatives do in equal measure... e.g. who you can or cannot marry, what you can or cannot put in your body, etc.
I am fairly conservative on some points, and can appreciate the wisdom to avoid sudden or dramatic change without consideration of second and third order effects, no matter how noble or right minded the intention. I am also very liberal with regard to individual liberty and fairness. Low on my scale are points of authority and sanctity, which would also show that I lean liberal, yet I managed to thrive in the Marine Corps; a very conservative institution.

Most conservatives believe this: The Declaration of Independence created/laid the ground-work for this country and the US Constitution/Bill of Rights are the laws limiting the government's role in OUR ability to self-govern.

After taking the oath to defend the US Constitution and actually reading it, you see where the founders attempted to limit governments role in our Natural Rights. The enumerated powers are there for a reason and watching our legislators completely overstep Article I Section VIII and Article IV Section IV is disheartening to watch when both the left and right partake in party politics over rule of law.

George Washington's farewell speech is excellent warning regarding faction/party. I value my oath to that document more than any party or person. Ask your self this, what makes you happy and as a self-governing individual, who's responsibility is it to ensure your welfare as it pertains to your happiness.

"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men (all people regardless of socio/economic group) are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator (God, Gaia, or any other deity or nature itself) with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

"We the people (all people regardless of socio/economic group) of the United States (citizens bound by our sovereign borders and laws)..."

I would say most liberals believe that as well. The issue is with interpretation. I recall how many "conservatives" were up in arms when Obama called the Constitution a "limiting document", which it most certainly is. And while many/most people that self-identify as "conservative" will state their desire that the federal government remain restricted, they fully support laws dictating who a person may or may not marry (ban on gay marriage), or what an individual can put in their own bodies (war on drugs), so it would not appear that they have any issue exercising the power of the federal government to limit individual freedom.

I don't feel that it attempts to pigeonhole people as much as it attempts to provide a basis for a broad spectrum. Are there points of moral foundation that you feel are missing from the five presented?

Morals and ethics are determined culturally and are fluid. The data presented had no evidence based components. With respect to the pillars they are philosophical constructs and were nicely supported historical cultural philosophies. The developmental brain information was not based on any scientific literature it was purely opinion based. As a philosophy piece it was interesting.

"Morals and ethics are determined culturally and are fluid." - Can you provide any data or evidence in support of your claim? As for the developmental brain information, Haidt cites Marcus 2004: The Birth of the Mind, and there actually is a large body of scientific evidence, and not purely opinion based.
You may find this interesting: http://www.moralfoundations.org/critiques

This is an inductive argument for the philosophical constructs of your ascertain. No real conclusions can be made although we can keep thinking about it. Do you disagree with my reasoning with respect to fluidity of ethics and morals? Have you ever changed your opinion on something? Have you ever been wrong about something or someone?

Of course there are those that are easily triggered and get defensive and won't be able to watch all the way through. It won't stop them from leaving a comment that contributes nothing to the conversation however. This video is not for them, but thank you for your contribution all the same.

Guess you missed my point.

MAJ(P) (Join to see) - Not as much as you might think.