Haidt, j
<font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><b style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: large;">coddling bk with greg l fire</b></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>
</b></font><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">121? bookTV? pulls a peterson recycle old dad advice?</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">an 8 22</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In a <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/07/social-media-harm-facebook-meta-response/670975/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">recent piece for <em>The Atlantic</em></a><em>, </em>social psychologist Jonathan Haidt argues that social media platforms are destroying democracy. They allow people to sort themselves into homogenous tribes, he argues.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt says that they can spread disinformation more quickly. People could be attacked more easily. “It was as if the platforms had passed out a billion little dart guns, and although most users didn’t want to shoot anyone, three kinds of people began darting others with abandon: the far right, the far left and trolls,” he writes.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt, an NYU professor, has been constructing this narrative for several years. He is one of a growing cadre of scholars and writers who are concerned about the heightened polarization in the United States and what it might mean for our democracy. I am one of them.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="">READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/05/4chan-republican-rhetoric-mass-murderer/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="self" title="view post: How 4chan fantasies and Republican rhetoric molded the Buffalo mass murderer: report" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">How 4chan fantasies and Republican rhetoric molded the Buffalo mass murderer: report</a></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Creating conflict</font></strong></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As are Kevin Kruse and Julian E. Zelizer.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Kruse and Zelizer are professors of history at Princeton University. Their book <em>Fault Lines </em>also tackles America’s increasingly fractious society. The two historians take a broader sweep than Haidt does, arguing that America, since the 1970s, has become increasingly divided along political, economic, racial and sexual (gender) lines.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For Kruse and Zelizer, social media’s role has been to amplify those divisions. Cable stations in the 1980s and the internet in the early 2000s were technologies that had promised to democratize and expand the public square. That may have happened, but these technologies, they say, also further fragmented the population.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="">READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/05/ben-shapiro-unwind-gay-marriage/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="self" title="view post: Ben Shapiro calls on Supreme Court to 'unwind' same-sex marriage" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Ben Shapiro calls on Supreme Court to 'unwind' same-sex marriage</a></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Kruse and Zelizer write that, “the fragmentation created a world with fewer points of commonality in terms of what people heard or saw, even as computing and cable technology emerged as the medium through which most people consumed their cultural goods.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I find Haidt’s and Kruse and Zelizer’s arguments to be compelling. Both give plausible explanations for what many of us experience.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I’m more sympathetic to Haidt’s argument on social media, however. I think social media does more than amplify conflict. It creates it.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">And there is a class of people, found disproportionately on the political right, who use it to exploit conflict for profit.</font></p><p style=""><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Professional dividers</font></strong></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“Grifter” is the trendy term for these folks.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">I prefer “professional dividers,” though.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">A grifter can be an online dating coach, or a therapist promising to solve your problems for a fee. A professional divider’s express purpose is to sow division in the population, then monetize it.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Think of Ben Shapiro.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Matt Walsh.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Steven Crowder.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Candace Owens.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">They have huge social media platforms that they use to sow division. They and other professional dividers can be distinguished from professional good-faith commentators by the content they create.</font></p><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><ul class="ee-ul" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; display: inline-block; width: 589.444px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font></font><li style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>They seek controversy. </b>There is a hyper-focus on hot-button cultural issues or hot takes that will get clicks. As I write this, Matt Walsh has just published <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCD37XA36fI" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">a video</a> entitled “Ugly People On Reality Shows?” where he takes umbrage with what he calls the “woke mob” calling for body diversity on reality shows.</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></li></ul><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> </span></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" /></font><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">They </span><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">demonize groups</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-family: " times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">. Because professional dividers are primarily on the right, the people demonized will always be on the left. The target group’s actions will be interpreted in the worst possible way. This demonization also occurs through the spreading of misinformation or telling outright lies. Consider Candace Owen’s tweet stating that:</span><blockquote style="margin: 1em 40px 1em -5px; line-height: 32px; background: rgb(245, 245, 245); padding: 10px 20px 10px 24px; border-left: 4px solid rgb(11, 13, 101); width: 602.542px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="">79% of Planned Parenthood clinics are in minority neighborhoods. This is not by accident. That is by its founder, Margaret Sanger's, eugenicist design. Go back and read her quotations. The Left sees racism everywhere except for where it actually is.</font></blockquote><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is misinformation designed to fan the flames of controversy and paint the left as targeting Black people for abortions. Owens’ claims have been determined to be <a href="https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/may/18/candace-owens/fact-checking-claim-most-planned-parenthood-clinic/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">mostly false</a> by Politifact.</font></p><ul class="ee-ul" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em; padding: 0px; display: inline-block; width: 589.444px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><li><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>They are predictable. </b>Professional dividers are attempting to grow an audience, and they need to feed that audience with consistent outrage material in the same political direction. Ben Shapiro called the intro to Michelle Obama’s new book “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK1Re0jaMf4" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">absolutely insipid</a>.” It is impossible to imagine Shapiro producing a take other than this. Obama is a democrat and therefore cannot write a book worthy of reading.</font></li></ul><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Turning profits
</font></strong></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These tactics separate professional dividers from the commentators in your newspaper or newsletter of choice. The presence of this highly lucrative profession is one of the main reasons why we are so polarized. Some people sow division and make money from it.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The paradigmatic example of this is mathematician turned massage therapist turned rightwing cultural critic <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A.Lindsay" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">James Lindsay</a>. A holder of a doctorate in mathematics, Lindsay has leveraged a strange mix of academic critique, white grievance and conspiratorial thinking to build a large social media presence.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Lindsay originally focused on demonizing academics and the academic disciplines (eg, queer studies, women’s studies, critical race theory or CRT) that catered to the experiences of minorities.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He and fellow professional divider Christopher Rufo were at the forefront of spreading the lies and disinformation surrounding CRT.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Lindsay has since moved on to other controversial topics. He has been credited with popularizing <a href="https://www.mediamatters.org/twitter/twitter-says-slandering-lgbtq-people-groomers-violates-its-rules-enforcement-has-been" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">the false claim that LGBTQ people are “groomers”</a> exploiting children sexually. Twitter has <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/twitter-says-it-bans-using-groomer-as-an-anti-lgtbq-slur-but-its-enforcement-is-lacking/ar-AAZPZnU" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">banned using the word groomer</a> as an anti-LGBTQ slur. Lindsay’s repeated use of the word has led to his <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-banned-ok-groomer-guy-james-lindsay-is-not-a-free-speech-martyr" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">permanent suspension</a> from Twitter.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Another example is sportswriter <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Whitlock" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Jason Whitlock</a>.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ackshully</font></strong></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Whitlock, who is Black, has started a YouTube channel called “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/c/jasonwhitlock" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Fearless</a>,” where he critiques leftist “woke” culture. His toxic mix is Christian nationalism with standard conservative anti-Blackness.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Consider his <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPIJKj4NwBo" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">amazing explanation</a> for why we didn’t have many Black quarterbacks in the NFL until recently. It wasn’t racism, he said. It was that Black boys didn’t learn to be leaders because so many grow up in “broken” homes without fathers. As a result, he said, they didn’t have the leadership skills necessary to be a good NFL quarterback.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But technology – the vast array of devices used to record, analyze and communicate aspects of the game– has made it possible for coaches to manage the game from the sidelines. “The game has actually gotten easier for the quarterback,” he said, “and more responsibility has been put on the sidelines and the coaches.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Ah, I see.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Coaches and coaching staff (all of whom, we can suppose, had fathers?) can use Wi-Fi connections to help the rudderless Black quarterback from a tragic single-parent home manage the game.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This kind of outrageous take is tailor-made for controversy. It wasn’t racism that prevented Black athletes from playing the quarterback position. No, no. It was <em>ackshully</em> the Democrats and their welfare policies that put future Black quarterbacks in broken homes!</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><strong><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">If only we took action sooner</font></strong></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In his piece, Haidt drew parallels between social science research on social media today and research on smoking in the 20th century.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Cigarette makers could ward off calls for regulation because, although there was a preponderance of evidence that tobacco caused cancer, the link had not been conclusive. One can ask how many people lost died because the science was not settled.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Similarly, Facebook and other social media companies have claimed that <a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2021/09/what-the-wall-street-journal-got-wrong/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">the science is not settled</a> on whether social media harms our democracy. Haidt advocates for taking action now, as there is a preponderance of evidence that social media harms democracy.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I have the same sentiments about professional dividers.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">These people threaten our democracy by purposefully creating controversy, spreading lies and disinformation, demonizing fellow Americans, and sowing division for profit.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As they are primarily on the right, they give fodder to bigoted elements within the Republican Party. Let’s keep using our free counterspeech to work on deplatforming these people.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">We can’t wait for scholars to draw a definitive link between their actions and conflict in our society. By then, it may be too late, and our society will be the equivalent of a person with stage 4 lung cancer being told it was probably because of the cigarettes.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">READ MORE: <a href="https://www.alternet.org/2022/02/ben-shapiro-elon-musk-tweet/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="self" title="view post: Ben Shapiro defends Elon Musk's tweet comparing Justin Trudeau to Adolf Hitler" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">Ben Shapiro defends Elon Musk's tweet comparing Justin Trudeau to Adolf Hitler</a></font></p></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/07/social-media-harm-facebook-meta-response/670975/</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" /><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">NOTE GIVES NO EVIDENCE FOR DAMAGE BY SJW</font></div><div>no lnx</div><div>IDEAS</div><div>YES, SOCIAL MEDIA REALLY IS UNDERMINING DEMOCRACY</div><div>Despite what Meta has to say.</div><div>
</div><div>By Jonathan Haidt</div><div>An American flag being punctured by computer cursors</div><div>Katie Martin / The Atlantic; Getty</div><div>JULY 28, 2022</div><div>
</div><div>About the author: Jonathan Haidt is a social psychologist at the New York University Stern School of Business. He is the co-author of The Coddling of the American Mind, which originated as a September 2015 Atlantic story, and he is currently writing Life After Babel: Adapting to a World We Can No Longer Share.</div><div>
</div><div>Within the past 15 years, social media has insinuated itself into American life more deeply than food-delivery apps into our diets and microplastics into our bloodstreams. Look at stories about conflict, and it’s often lurking in the background. Recent articles on the rising dysfunction within progressive organizations point to the role of Twitter, Slack, and other platforms in prompting “endless and sprawling internal microbattles,” as The Intercept’s Ryan Grim put it, referring to the ACLU. At a far higher level of conflict, the congressional hearings about the January 6 insurrection show us how Donald Trump’s tweets summoned the mob to Washington and aimed it at the vice president. Far-right groups then used a variety of platforms to coordinate and carry out the attack.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Social media has changed life in America in a thousand ways, and nearly two out of three Americans now believe that these changes are for the worse. But academic researchers have not yet reached a consensus that social media is harmful. That’s been a boon to social-media companies such as Meta, which argues, as did tobacco companies, that the science is not “settled.”</b></div><div>
</div><div>The lack of consensus leaves open the possibility that social media may not be very harmful. Perhaps we’ve fallen prey to yet another moral panic about a new technology and, as with television, we’ll worry about it less after a few decades of conflicting studies. A different possibility is that social media is quite harmful but is changing too quickly for social scientists to capture its effects. The research community is built on a quasi-moral norm of skepticism: We begin by assuming the null hypothesis (in this case, that social media is not harmful), and we require researchers to show strong, statistically significant evidence in order to publish their findings. This takes time—a couple of years, typically, to conduct and publish a study; five or more years before review papers and meta-analyses come out; sometimes decades before scholars reach agreement. Social-media platforms, meanwhile, can change dramatically in just a few years.</div><div>
</div><div>So even if social media really did begin to undermine democracy (and institutional trust and teen mental health) in the early 2010s, we should not expect social science to “settle” the matter until the 2030s. By then, the effects of social media will be radically different, and the harms done in earlier decades may be irreversible.</div><div>
</div><div>Let me back up. This spring, The Atlantic published my essay “Why the Past 10 Years of American Life Have Been Uniquely Stupid,” in which I argued that the best way to understand the chaos and fragmentation of American society is to see ourselves as citizens of Babel in the days after God rendered them unable to understand one another.</div><div>
</div><div><b>I showed how a few small changes to the architecture of social-media platforms, implemented from 2009 to 2012, increased the virality of posts on those platforms, which then changed the nature of social relationships. People could spread rumors and half-truths more quickly, and they could more readily sort themselves into homogenous tribes.</b> Even more important, in my view, was that social-media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook could now be used more easily by anyone to attack anyone. It was as if the platforms had passed out a billion little dart guns, and although most users didn’t want to shoot anyone, three kinds of people began darting others with abandon: the far right, the far left, and trolls.</div><div>
</div><div>RECOMMENDED READING</div><div>ARTHUR C. BROOKS</div><div>Jonathan Haidt and Tobias Rose-Stockwell: The dark psychology of social networks</div><div>
</div><div><b>All of these groups were suddenly given the power to dominate conversations and intimidate dissenters into silence. A fourth group—Russian agents––also got a boost, though they didn’t need to attack people directly. Their long-running project, which ramped up online in 2013, was to fabricate, exaggerate, or simply promote stories that would increase Americans’ hatred of one another and distrust of their institutions.</b></div><div>
</div><div>The essay proved to be surprisingly uncontroversial—or, at least, hardly anyone attacked me on social media. But a few responses were published, including one from Meta (formerly Facebook), which pointed to studies it said contradicted my argument. There was also an essay in The New Yorker by Gideon Lewis-Kraus, who interviewed me and other scholars who study politics and social media. He argued that social media might well be harmful to democracies, but the research literature is too muddy and contradictory to support firm conclusions.</div><div>
</div><div>So was my diagnosis correct, or are concerns about social media overblown? It’s a crucial question for the future of our society. As I argued in my essay, critics make us smarter. I’m grateful, therefore, to Meta and the researchers interviewed by Lewis-Kraus for helping me sharpen and extend my argument in three ways.</div><div>
</div><div>Are Democracies Becoming More Polarized and Less Healthy?</div><div>
</div><div><b>My essay laid out a wide array of harms that social media has inflicted on society. Political polarization is just one of them, but it is central to the story of rising democratic dysfunction.</b></div><div>
</div><div>Meta questioned whether social media should be blamed for increased polarization. In response to my essay, Meta’s head of research, Pratiti Raychoudhury, pointed to a study by Levi Boxell, Matthew Gentzkow, and Jesse Shapiro that looked at trends in 12 countries and found, she said, “that in some countries polarization was on the rise before Facebook even existed, and in others it has been decreasing while internet and Facebook use increased.” In a recent interview with the podcaster Lex Fridman, Mark Zuckerberg cited this same study in support of a more audacious claim: “Most of the academic studies that I’ve seen actually show that social-media use is correlated with lower polarization.”</div><div>
</div><div>Does that study really let social media off the hook? It plotted political polarization based on survey responses in 12 countries, most with data stretching back to the 1970s, and then drew straight lines that best fit the data points over several decades. It’s true that, while some lines sloped upward (meaning that polarization increased across the period as a whole), others sloped downward. But my argument wasn’t about the past 50 years. It was about a phase change that happened in the early 2010s, after Facebook and Twitter changed their architecture to enable hyper-virality.</div><div>
</div><div>I emailed Gentzkow to ask whether he could put a “hinge” in the graphs in the early 2010s, to see if the trends in polarization changed direction or accelerated in the past decade. He replied that there was not enough data after 2010 to make such an analysis reliable.<b> He also noted that Meta’s response essay had failed to cite a 2020 article in which he and three colleagues found that randomly assigning participants to deactivate Facebook for the four weeks before the 2018 U.S. midterm elections reduced polarization.</b></div><div>
</div><div>Meta’s response motivated me to look for additional publications to evaluate what had happened to democracies in the 2010s. I discovered four. One of them found no overall trend in polarization, but like the study by Boxell, Gentzkow, and Shapiro, it had few data points after 2015. <span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The other three had data through 2020, and all three reported substantial increases in polarization and/or declines in the number or quality of democracies around the world.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">One of them, a 2022 report from the Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute, found that “liberal democracies peaked in 2012 with 42 countries and are now down to the lowest levels in over 25 years.” It summarized the transformations of global democracy over the past 10 years in stark terms:</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Just ten years ago the world looked very different from today. In 2011, there were more countries improving than declining on every aspect of democracy. By 2021 the world has been turned on its head: there are more countries declining than advancing on nearly all democratic aspects captured by V-Dem measures.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The report also notes that “toxic polarization”—signaled by declining “respect for counter-arguments and associated aspects of the deliberative component of democracy”—grew more severe in at least 32 countries.</span></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">A paper published one week after my Atlantic essay, by Yunus E. Orhan, found a global spike in democratic “backsliding” since 2008, and linked it to affective polarization, or animosity toward the other side. When affective polarization is high, partisans tolerate antidemocratic behavior by politicians on their own side––such as the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">And finally, the Economist Intelligence Unit reported a global decline in various democratic measures starting after 2015, according to its Democracy Index.</span></div><div>
</div><div>These three studies cannot prove that social media caused the global decline, but—contra Meta and Zuckerberg—they show a global trend toward polarization in the previous decade, the one in which the world embraced social media.</div><div>
</div><div>Has Social Media Created Harmful Echo Chambers?</div><div>
</div><div>So why did democracies weaken in the 2010s? How might social media have made them more fragmented and less stable? One popular argument contends that social media sorts users into echo chambers––closed communities of like-minded people. Lack of contact with people who hold different viewpoints allows a sort of tribal groupthink to take hold, reducing the quality of everyone’s thinking and the prospects for compromise that are essential in a democratic system.</div><div>
</div><div><b>According to Meta, however, “More and more research discredits the idea that social media algorithms create an echo chamber.” It points to two sources to back up that claim, but many studies show evidence that social media does in fact create echo chambers</b>. Because conflicting studies are common in social-science research, I created a “collaborative review” document last year with Chris Bail, a sociologist at Duke University who studies social media. It’s a public Google doc in which we organize the abstracts of all the studies we can find about social media’s impact on democracy, and then we invite other experts to add studies, comments, and criticisms. We cover research on seven different questions, including whether social media promotes echo chambers. After spending time in the document, Lewis-Kraus wrote in The New Yorker: “The upshot seemed to me to be that exactly nothing was unambiguously clear.”</div><div>
</div><div>He is certainly right that nothing is unambiguous. But as I have learned from curating three such documents, researchers often reach opposing conclusions because they have “operationalized” the question differently. That is, they have chosen different ways to turn an abstract question (about the prevalence of echo chambers, say) into something concrete and measurable. For example, researchers who choose to measure echo chambers by looking at the diversity of people’s news consumption typically find little evidence that they exist at all. Even partisans end up being exposed to news stories and videos from the other side. Both of the sources that Raychoudhury cited in her defense of Meta mention this idea.</div><div>
</div><div>[Derek Thompson: Social media is attention alcohol]</div><div>
</div><div><b>But researchers who measure echo chambers by looking at social relationships and networks usually find evidence of “homophily”—that is, people tend to engage with others who are similar to themselves. One study of politically engaged Twitter users, for example, found that they “are disproportionately exposed to like-minded information and that information reaches like-minded users more quickly.</b>”</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">So should we throw up our hands and say that the findings are irreconcilable? No, we should integrate them, as the sociologist Zeynep Tufekci did in a 2018 essay. Coming across contrary viewpoints on social media, she wrote, is “not like reading them in a newspaper while sitting alone.” Rather, she said, “it’s like hearing them from the opposing team while sitting with our fellow fans in a football stadium … We bond with our team by yelling at the fans of the other one.” <b>Mere exposure to different sources of news doesn’t automatically break open echo chambers; in fact, it can reinforce them.</b></span></div><div>
</div><div>These closely bonded groupings can have profound political ramifications, as a couple of my critics in the New Yorker article acknowledged. A major feature of the post-Babel world is that the extremes are now far louder and more influential than before. They may also become more violent. Recent research by Morteza Dehghani and his colleagues at the University of Southern California shows that <b>people are more willing to commit violence when they are immersed in a community they perceive to be morally homogeneous.</b></div><div>
</div><div>This finding seems to be borne out by a statement from the 18-year-old man who recently killed 10 Black Americans at a supermarket in Buffalo. In the Q&A portion of the manifesto attributed to him, he wrote:</div><div>
</div><div>Where did you get your current beliefs?</div><div>
</div><div>Mostly from the internet. There was little to no influence on my personal beliefs by people I met in person.</div><div>
</div><div>The killer goes on to claim that he had read information “from all ideologies,” but I find it unlikely that he consumed a balanced informational diet, or, more important, that he hung out online with ideologically diverse users. The fact that he livestreamed his shooting tells us he assumed that his community shared his warped worldview. He could not have found such an extreme yet homogeneous group in his small town 200 miles from Buffalo. But thanks to social media, he found an international fellowship of extreme racists who jointly worshipped past mass murderers and from whom he copied sections of his manifesto.</div><div>
</div><div>Is Social Media the Primary Villain in This Story?</div><div>
</div><div>In her response to my essay, Raychoudhury did not deny that Meta bore any blame. Rather, her defense was two-pronged, arguing that the research is not yet definitive, and that, in any case, we should be focusing on mainstream media as the primary cause of harm.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Raychoudhury pointed to a study on the role of cable TV and mainstream media as major drivers of partisanship.</b> She is correct to do so: The American culture war has roots going back to the turmoil of the 1960s, which activated evangelicals and other conservatives in the ’70s. Social media (which arrived around 2004 and became truly pernicious, I argue, only after 2009) is indeed a more recent player in this phenomenon.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In my essay, I included a paragraph on this backstory, noting the role of Fox News and the radicalizing Republican Party of the ’90s, but I should have said more. The story of polarization is complex, and political scientists cite a variety of contributing factors, including the growing politicization of the urban-rural divide; rising immigration; the increasing power of big and very partisan donors; the loss of a common enemy when the Soviet Union collapsed; and the loss of the “Greatest Generation,” which had an ethos of service forged in the crisis of the Second World War. And although polarization rose rapidly in the 2010s, the rise began in the ’90s, so I cannot pin the majority of the rise on social media.</span></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But my essay wasn’t primarily about ordinary polarization. I was trying to explain a new dynamic that emerged in the 2010s: the fear of one another, even—and perhaps especially––within groups that share political or cultural affinities. This fear has created a whole new set of social and political problems.</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The loss of a common enemy and those other trends with roots in the 20th century can help explain America’s ever nastier cross-party relationships, but they can’t explain why so many college students and professors suddenly began to express more fear, and engage in more self-censorship, around 2015. These mostly left-leaning people weren’t worried about the “other side”; they were afraid of a small number of students who were further to the left, and who enthusiastically hunted for verbal transgressions and used social media to publicly shame offenders.<b> oh no SJW!</b></span></div><div>
</div><div><b>A few years later, that same fearful dynamic spread to newsrooms, companies, nonprofit organizations, and many other parts of society. </b>The culture war had been running for two or three decades by then, but it changed in the mid-2010s when ordinary people with little to no public profile suddenly became the targets of social-media mobs. Consider the famous 2013 case of Justine Sacco, who tweeted an insensitive joke about her trip to South Africa just before boarding her flight in London and became an international villain by the time she landed in Cape Town. She was fired the next day. Or consider the the far right’s penchant for using social media to publicize the names and photographs of largely unknown local election officials, health officials, and school-board members who refuse to bow to political pressure, and who are then subjected to waves of vitriol, including threats of violence to themselves and their children, simply for doing their jobs. These phenomena, now common to the culture, could not have happened before the advent of hyper-viral social media in 2009. FALSE BALANCE?</div><div>
</div><div>[Matthew Hindman, Nathaniel Lubin, and Trevor Davis: Facebook has a superuser-supremacy problem]</div><div>
</div><div>This fear of getting shamed, reported, doxxed, fired, or physically attacked is responsible for the self-censorship and silencing of dissent that were the main focus of my essay. When dissent within any group or institution is stifled, the group will become less perceptive, nimble, and effective over time.</div><div>
</div><div>Social media may not be the primary cause of polarization, but it is an important cause, and one we can do something about. I believe it is also the primary cause of the epidemic of structural stupidity, as I called it, that has recently afflicted many of America’s key institutions.</div><div>
</div><div>What Can We Do to Make Things Better?</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">My essay presented a series of structural solutions that would allow us to repair some of the damage that social media has caused to our key democratic and epistemic institutions. I proposed three imperatives: (1) harden democratic institutions so that they can withstand chronic anger and mistrust, (2) reform social media so that it becomes less socially corrosive, and (3) better prepare the next generation for democratic citizenship in this new age.</span></div><div>
</div><div>I believe that we should begin implementing these reforms now, even if the science is not yet “settled.” Beyond a reasonable doubt is the appropriate standard of evidence for reviewers guarding admission to a scientific journal, or for jurors establishing guilt in a criminal trial. It is too high a bar for questions about public health or threats to the body politic. A more appropriate standard is the one used in civil trials: the preponderance of evidence. Is social media probably damaging American democracy via at least one of the seven pathways analyzed in our collaborative-review document, or probably not? I urge readers to examine the document themselves. I also urge the social-science community to find quicker ways to study potential threats such as social media, where platforms and their effects change rapidly. Our motto should be “Move fast and test things.” Collaborative-review documents are one way to speed up the process by which scholars find and respond to one another’s work.</div><div>
</div><div>Beyond these structural solutions, I considered adding a short section to the article on what each of us can do as individuals, but it sounded a bit too preachy, so I cut it. I now regret that decision. I should have noted that all of us, as individuals, can be part of the solution by choosing to act with courage, moderation, and compassion. It takes a great deal of resolve to speak publicly or stand your ground when a barrage of snide, disparaging, and otherwise hostile comments is coming at you and nobody rises to your defense (out of fear of getting attacked themselves).</div><div>
</div><div>Read: How to fix Twitter—and all of social media</div><div>
</div><div>Fortunately, social media does not usually reflect real life, something that more people are beginning to understand. A few years ago, I heard an insight from an older business executive. He noted that before social media, if he received a dozen angry letters or emails from customers, they spurred him to action because he assumed that there must be a thousand other disgruntled customers who didn’t bother to write. But now, if a thousand people like an angry tweet or Facebook post about his company, he assumes that there must be a dozen people who are really upset.</div><div>
</div><div>Seeing that social-media outrage is transient and performative should make it easier to withstand, whether you are the president of a university or a parent speaking at a school-board meeting. We can all do more to offer honest dissent and support the dissenters within institutions that have become structurally stupid. We can all get better at listening with an open mind and speaking in order to engage another human being rather than impress an audience. Teaching these skills to our children and our students is crucial, because they are the generation who will have to reinvent deliberative democracy and Tocqueville’s “art of association” for the digital age.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">We must act with compassion too. The fear and cruelty of the post-Babel era are a result of its tendency to reward public displays of aggression. Social media has put us all in the middle of a Roman coliseum, and many in the audience want to see conflict and blood. But once we realize that we are the gladiators—tricked into combat so that we might generate “content,” “engagement,” and revenue—we can refuse to fight. We can be more understanding toward our fellow citizens, seeing that we are all being driven mad by companies that use largely the same set of psychological tricks. We can forswear public conflict and use social media to serve our own purposes, which for most people will mean more private communication and fewer public performances.</span></div><div>
</div><div>The post-Babel world will not be rebuilt by today’s technology companies. That work will be left to citizens who understand the forces that brought us to the verge of self-destruction, and who develop the new habits, virtues, technologies, and shared narratives that will allow us to reap the benefits of living and working together in peace.</div><div>
</div><div>Jonathan Haidt is a social psychologist at the New York University Stern School of Business. He is the co-author of The Coddling of the American Mind, which originated as a September 2015 Atlantic story, and he is currently writing Life After Babel: Adapting to a World We Can No Longer Share.</div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=
</font><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">booktv
</font><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>coddling bk with greg l fire</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">intro had aclu BS, when asked trotted out sivler? said long assoc w/ NY civ rights org?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">pseudo-lib</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">nervous brkdwn now evang for behav cogn therapy</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">claimed trigger and safe space minor bit that got blown up by others?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">alas an</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">4 22</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">du<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">ring the 1980s, political journalists focused heavily on the relationship between conservative Republican President Ronald Reagan and liberal Democratic House Speaker Tip O’Neill — stressing that for all their disagreements, they were genuinely fond of one another and managed to find common ground. Such an alliance is hard to imagine in the deeply divided America of the 2020s. The word “tribalism” has often been used to describe the United States’ deep political and social divisions, but in an</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> </span><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-media-democracy-trust-babel/629369/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="blank" class="rm-stats-tracked" style="text-decoration-line: none; opacity: 1; transition: color 0.25s ease 0s, background 0.25s ease 0s, opacity 0.25s ease 0s;">essay/think piece for The Atlantic</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt argues that the United States’ divisions are even worse than tribalism.</span></font></div><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt uses the story of Babel in the Old Testament to describe modern-day America in his article, which was published on April 11. And he certainly doesn’t mean it in a good way.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The story of Babel is the best metaphor I have found for what happened to America in the 2010s, and for the fractured country we now inhabit,” Haidt explains. “Something went terribly wrong, very suddenly. We are disoriented, unable to speak the same language or recognize the same truth. We are cut off from one another and from the past.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt continues, “It’s been clear for quite a while now that Red America and Blue America are becoming like two different countries claiming the same territory, with two different versions of the Constitution, economics, and American history. But Babel is not a story about tribalism; it’s a story about the fragmentation of everything. It’s about the shattering of all that had seemed solid, the scattering of people who had been a community. It’s a metaphor for what is happening not only between red and blue, but within the left and within the right, as well as within universities, companies, professional associations, museums, and even families.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Technology, Haidt laments, has played a major role in the “fragmentation” of the U.S.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Historically, civilizations have relied on shared blood, gods and enemies to counteract the tendency to split apart as they grow,” Haidt notes. “But what is it that holds together large and diverse secular democracies such as the United States and India, or, for that matter, modern Britain and France?”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt adds, “Social scientists have identified at least three major forces that collectively bind together successful democracies: social capital — extensive social networks with high levels of trust — strong institutions, and shared stories. Social media has weakened all three.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter evolved in the 2010s, Haidt argues, they “trained users to spend more time performing and less time connecting” — and that “encouraged dishonesty and mob dynamics” as well as plenty of amplified “outrage.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to Haidt, “Social media has both magnified and weaponized the frivolous…. It’s not just the waste of time and scarce attention that matters; it’s the continual chipping-away of trust. An autocracy can deploy propaganda or use fear to motivate the behaviors it desires, but a democracy depends on widely internalized acceptance of the legitimacy of rules, norms, and institutions. Blind and irrevocable trust in any particular individual or organization is never warranted, but when citizens lose trust in elected leaders, health authorities, the courts, the police, universities, and the integrity of elections, then every decision becomes contested; every election becomes a life-and-death struggle to save the country from the other side.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The “ascendancy” of former President Donald Trump on the right and the “great awokening” of the left, Haidt adds, were encouraged by social media — which intensified culture-war politics and promoted “stupidity.” As Haidt sees it, “<b>America’s key institutions” became “stupider en masse” thanks to the weaponizing of social media.</b></font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Haidt writes, “The dart guns of social media give more power and voice to the political extremes while reducing the power and voice of the moderate majority…. Political extremists don’t just shoot darts at their enemies; they spend a lot of their ammunition targeting dissenters or nuanced thinkers on their own team. In this way, social media makes a political system based on compromise grind to a halt…. By giving everyone a dart gun, social media deputizes everyone to administer justice with no due process.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt is critical of both the left and the right in his essay, lamenting the rise of QAnon and Trumpism on the right as well as what he views as intolerance on the left.</font></p><p style=""><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“The Democrats have also been hit hard by structural stupidity, though in a different way,” Haidt argues. </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">“In the Democratic Party, the struggle between the progressive wing and the more moderate factions is open and ongoing, and often, the moderates win. The problem is that the left controls the commanding heights of the culture: universities, news organizations, Hollywood, art museums,<b> advertising</b>, much of Silicon Valley, and the <b>teachers’ unions and teaching colleges that shape K–12 education.</b> And in many of those institutions, dissent <em style="">has</em> been stifled: When everyone was issued a dart gun in the early 2010s, many left-leaning institutions began shooting themselves in the brain.”</span></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt ends his essay on an ominous note, warning that unless the U.S. finds new ways of “building trust and friendship across the political divide,” things will only get worse.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“We cannot expect Congress and the tech companies to save us,” Haiti argues. “We must change ourselves and our communities. What would it be like to live in Babel in the days after its destruction? We know. It is a time of confusion and loss. But it is also a time to reflect, listen, and build.”</font></p><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">https://www.amazon.com/Coddling-American-Mind-Intentions-Generation/dp/0735224897</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">blurb</font></div><div><div id="descriptionAndDetails" class="a-section a-spacing-extra-large" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div id="productDescription_feature_div" class="celwidget flavor-5553" data-feature-name="productDescription" data-cel-widget="productDescription_feature_div" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div id="productDescription_feature_div" data-feature-name="productDescription" data-template-name="productDescription" class="a-row feature" data-cel-widget="productDescription_feature_div" style="box-sizing: border-box; width: 1547px;"><div id="productDescription" class="a-section a-spacing-small prodDescWidth" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0.5em 0px 0em 25px; word-wrap: break-word; line-height: initial; max-width: 1000px;"><h3 style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 0px 0px 4px; margin: 0.75em 0px 0.375em -15px; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.255; clear: left;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">eview</font></h3><div aria-live="polite" data-a-expander-collapsed-height="300" class="a-expander-collapsed-height a-row a-expander-container a-expander-partial-collapse-container" style="box-sizing: border-box; width: 1000px; overflow: hidden; position: relative; margin: 0px 0px 1em; max-height: none; height: 300px;"><div aria-expanded="false" class="a-expander-content a-expander-partial-collapse-content" style="box-sizing: border-box; overflow: hidden; position: relative; padding-bottom: 17px;"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 0px; margin: 0em 0px 1em 1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“A disturbing and comprehensive analysis of recent campus trends… Lukianoff and Haidt notice something unprecedented and frightening… The consequences of a generation unable or disinclined to engage with ideas that make them uncomfortable are dire for society, and open the door – accessible from both the left and the right – to various forms of authoritarianism.” — <span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Thomas Chatterton Williams, <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">The New York Times Book Review</i> (cover review and <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Editors’ Choice</i> selection)</span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />"So how do you create ‘wiser kids’? Get them off their screens. Argue with them. Get them out of their narrow worlds of family, school and university. Boot them out for a challenging Gap year. It all makes perfect sense…the cure seems a glorious revelation."—<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"> Philip Delves Broughton, <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Evening Standard</i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />“The authors, both of whom are liberal academics — almost a tautology on today’s campuses — do a great job of showing how ‘safetyism’ is cramping young minds. Students are treated like candles, which can be extinguished by a puff of wind. The goal of a Socratic education should be to turn them into fires, which thrive on the wind. Instead, they are sheltered from anything that could cause offence. . . Their advice is sound. Their book is excellent. Liberal parents, in particular, should read it.”<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">— Edward Luce, <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Financial Times</i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /> <br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />“Their distinctive contribution to the higher-education debate is to meet safetyism on its own, psychological turf… Lukianoff and Haidt tell us that safetyism undermines the freedom of inquiry and speech that are indispensable to universities.” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"><i style="box-sizing: border-box;"> </i>Jonathan Marks,<i style="box-sizing: border-box;"> Commentary</i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />“Perhaps the strongest argument in Haidt and Lukianoff’s favour, though, is this: if you see this issue as being about little more than a few sanctimonious teenagers throwing hissy fits on campus then, yes, it is probably receiving too much attention. But if you accept their premise, that it’s really a story about mental wellbeing and emotional fragility, about a generation acting out because it has been set up to fail by bad parenting and poorly designed institutions, then their message is an urgent one. And it is one that resonates well beyond dusty libraries and manicured quadrangles, into all of our lives.”—<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Josh Glancy,<i style="box-sizing: border-box;"> The Sunday Times </i>(UK)</span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />“Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff’s new book, <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure</i>, persuasively unpacks the causes of the current predicament on campus – which they link to wider parenting, cultural and political trends. . .The Coddling of the American Mind is both an enlightening but disquieting read. We have a lot of challenges in front of us.” — <span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"><i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Quillette, </i></span>Matthew Lesh<br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />"The authors remind us of some of the campus happenings that, since 2015, have afrighted old liberals like me... In the end [despite some objections] I agreed with Messrs Lukianoff and Haidt that protecting kids has gone too far, and that some campus behaviour is absurd and worrying." —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"> David Aaronovitch,<i style="box-sizing: border-box;"> The Times </i>(UK)</span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />"The speed with which campus life has changed for the worse is one of the most important points made by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt in this important if disturbing book." —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Niall Ferguson, <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Sunday Times</i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />“Rising intolerance for opposing viewpoints is a challenge not only on college campuses but also in our national political discourse. The future of our democracy requires us to understand what’s happening and why—so that we can find solutions and take action. Reading <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Coddling of the American Mind</i> is a great place to start.” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Michael Bloomberg, Founder of Bloomberg LP & Bloomberg Philanthropies, and 108th Mayor of New York City</span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />“Our behavior in society is not immune to the power of rational scientific analysis. Through that lens, prepare yourself for a candid look at the softening of America, and what we can do about it.” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Neil deGrasse Tyson, director, Hayden Planetarium, and author of <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Astrophysics for People in a Hurry <br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /></i><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /></span>“Lukianoff and Haidt explain the phenomenon of “helicopter parenting” and its dangers--how overprotection amplifies children’s fears and makes them less likely to become adults who can manage their own lives. Children must be challenged and exposed to stressors—including different perspectives—in order to thrive.” <span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">—<span style="box-sizing: border-box;">Susan McDaniel, University of Rochester, former President of the American Psychological Association<br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /></span></span>“An important examination of dismaying social and cultural trends.” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Kirkus Reviews</i></span></span><i style="box-sizing: border-box;"><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /></i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />"I lament the title of this book, as it may alienate the very people who need to engage with its arguments and obscures its message of inclusion. Equal parts mental health manual, parenting guide, sociological study, and political manifesto, it points to a positive way forward of hope, health, and humanism. I only wish I had read it when I was still a professor and a much younger mother." —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Anne-Marie Slaughter</span>, <span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">President and CEO, New America, and author of <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Unfinished Business</i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"><i style="box-sizing: border-box;"> <br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /></i></span>“A compelling and timely argument against attitudes and practices that, however well-intended, are damaging our universities, harming our children and leaving an entire generation intellectually and emotionally ill-prepared for an ever-more fraught and complex world. A brave and necessary work.<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box;">Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks</span>, <span style="box-sizing: border-box;">Emeritus Chief Rabbi of UK & Commonwealth; professor, New York University; and author of</span><i style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"> <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Not in God’s Name</i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><i style="box-sizing: border-box;"> </i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /></i></span>“No one is omniscient or infallible, so a willingness to evaluate new ideas is vital to understanding our world. Yet universities, which ought to be forums for open debate, are developing a reputation for dogmatism and intolerance. Haidt and Lukianoff, distinguished advocates of freedom of expression, offer a deep analysis of what’s going wrong on campus, and how we can hold universities to their highest ideals.” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Steven Pinker, professor, Harvard University, and author of <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Enlightenment Now</i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><i style="box-sizing: border-box;"> </i><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />“This book synthesizes the teachings of many disciplines to illuminate the causes of major problems besetting college students and campuses, including declines in mental health, academic freedom, and collegiality. More importantly, the authors present evidence-based strategies for overcoming these challenges. An engrossing, thought-provoking, and ultimately inspiring read.” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Nadine Strossen,</span> <span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">past President, ACLU, and author of <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">HATE: Why We Should Resist it with Free Speech, Not Censorship</i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /> <br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />“How can we as a nation do a better job of preparing young men and women of all backgrounds to be seekers of truth and sustainers of democracy? In <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Coddling of the American Mind</i>, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt provide a rigorous analysis of this perennial challenge as it presents itself today, and offer thoughtful prescriptions for meeting it. What’s more, the book models the virtues and practical wisdom its authors rightly propose as the keys to progress. Lukianoff and Haidt teach young people—and all of us—by example as well as precept.<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">”</span> —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Cornel West, professor, Harvard University, and author of <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Democracy Matters</i>; and Robert P. George, professor, Princeton University, and author of <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Conscience and Its Enemies</i></span><i style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /></span></i>“Objectionable words and ideas, as defined by self-appointed guardians on university campuses, are often treated like violence from sticks and stones. Many students cringe at robust debate; maintaining their ideas of good and evil requires no less than the silencing of disagreeable speakers. Lukianoff and Haidt brilliantly explain how this drift to fragility occurred, how the distinction between words and actions was lost, and what needs to be done. Critical reading to understand the current campus conflicts.” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;">Mark Yudof,</span> <span style="box-sizing: border-box;">president emeritus, University of California; and professor emeritus, UC Berkeley School of Law</span></span><i style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /></span></i><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />"This book is a much needed guide for how to thrive in a pluralistic society. Lukianoff and Haidt demonstrate how ancient wisdom and modern psychology can encourage more dialogue across lines of difference, build stronger institutions, and make us happier. They provide an antidote to our seemingly intractable divisions, and not a moment too soon.” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Kirsten Powers, author of <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Silencing</i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /> <br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />"We can talk ourselves into believing that some kinds of speech will shatter us, or we can talk ourselves out of that belief. The authors know the science. We are not as fragile as our self-appointed protectors suppose. Read this deeply informed book to become a more resilient soul in a more resilient democracy.” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Philip E. Tetlock</span>, <span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">author of <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction </i></span><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /> <br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />“In this expansion of their 2015 piece for the <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Atlantic</i>, Lukianoff and Haidt argue that the urge to insulate oneself against offensive ideas has had deleterious consequences, making students less resilient, more prone to undesirable “emotional reasoning,” less capable of engaging critically with others’ viewpoints, and more likely to cultivate an “us-versus-them” mentality… the path they advocate—take on challenges, cultivate resilience, and try to reflect rather than responding based solely on initial emotional responses—deserves consideration.” —<span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"><i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Publishers Weekly</i></span></font></p></div><div class="a-expander-header a-expander-partial-collapse-header" style="box-sizing: border-box; outline: 0px; position: absolute; bottom: 0px; width: 1000px; transition: opacity 0.4s ease-out 0s; opacity: 1;"><a data-action="a-expander-toggle" class="a-declarative" data-a-expander-toggle="{" allowlinkdefault="allowLinkDefault" true="true" expand_prompt="expand_prompt" read="Read" more="more" collapse_prompt="collapse_prompt" less="less" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><i class="a-icon a-icon-extender-expand" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-image: url(" https="https" m.media-amazon.com="m.media-amazon.com" images="images" g="G" auiclients="AUIClients" amazonuibasecss-sprite_1x-7233320d393c05a5508cf7d579641c4b327cbda4.v2.png="AmazonUIBaseCSS-sprite_1x-7233320d393c05a5508cf7d579641c4b327cbda4.V2.png" background-size="background-size" px="px" background-repeat="background-repeat" no-repeat="no-repeat" display="display" inline-block="inline-block" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" position="position" relative="relative" margin-right="margin-right" em="em" width="width" height="height" background-position="background-position"><span class="a-expander-prompt" style="box-sizing: border-box; word-wrap: break-word;">Read more</span></i></font></a></div></div><h3 style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 0px 0px 4px; margin: 0.75em 0px 0.375em -15px; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; font-weight: normal; line-height: 1.255; clear: left;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">About the Author</font></h3><div aria-live="polite" data-a-expander-collapsed-height="300" class="a-expander-collapsed-height a-row a-expander-container a-expander-partial-collapse-container" style="box-sizing: border-box; width: 1000px; overflow: hidden; position: relative; margin: 0px 0px 1em; max-height: 300px;"><div aria-expanded="false" class="a-expander-content a-expander-partial-collapse-content" style="box-sizing: border-box; overflow: hidden; position: relative;"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 0px; margin: 0em 0px 1em 1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Greg Lukianoff </span>is the president and CEO of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). Lukianoff is a graduate of American University and Stanford Law School. He specializes in free speech and First Amendment issues in higher education. He is the author of <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Unlearning Liberty: Campus Censorship and the End of American Debate</i> and <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">Freedom From Speech</i>.<br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;"><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" />Jonathan Haidt </span>is the Thomas Cooley Professor of Ethical Leadership at<b> New York University’s Stern School of Business.</b> He obtained his Ph.D. in social psychology from the University of Pennsylvania in 1992, and then taught at the University of Virginia for 16 years. He is the author of <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Righteous Mind</i> and <i style="box-sizing: border-box;">The Happiness Hypothesis</i>.</font></p></div></div></div></div></div></div><div id="detail-bullets" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a name="productDetails" id="productDetails" aria-hidden="true" style="box-sizing: border-box;" /></font><hr noshade="noshade" size="1" class="bucketDivider" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; height: 1px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-top-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(231, 231, 231); line-height: 19px; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 14px; clear: left;" /><table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" id="productDetailsTable" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 0px !important; border-collapse: collapse; width: auto;"><tbody style="box-sizing: border-box;"><tr style="box-sizing: border-box;"><td class="bucket" style="box-sizing: border-box; vertical-align: top; padding: 0px;"><h2 style="box-sizing: border-box; padding: 0px 0px 4px; margin: 0px; text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; font-weight: 400; line-height: 1.3;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Product details</font></h2><div class="content" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0.5em 0px 0px 25px;"><ul style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; list-style-type: none;"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; word-wrap: break-word; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Hardcover:</span> 352 pages</font></li><li style="box-sizing: border-box; list-style: none; word-wrap: break-word; margin: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-weight: 700;">Publisher:</span> Penguin Press (September 4, 2018)</font></li></ul></div></td></tr></tbody></table></div></div><div><a name="productDetails" id="productDetails" aria-hidden="true" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></a></div><div><div><a name="productDetails" id="productDetails" aria-hidden="true" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></a></div><div><a name="productDetails" id="productDetails" aria-hidden="true" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></a></div><div><div class="headline" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h1 class="node-title" style="line-height: 52px; margin: 0px 0px 10px; clear: both;"><a name="productDetails" id="productDetails" aria-hidden="true" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" style="" face="Times New Roman">Are Trump Supporters Evil or Just Wrong?</font></a></h1></div><div class="teaser" style="margin-bottom: 15px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="field field-name-field-teaser field-type-text-long field-label-hidden" style=""><div class="field-items" style=""><div class="field-item even" style=""><a name="productDetails" id="productDetails" aria-hidden="true" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style=""><b>A battle between two arcane-sounding theories about ideology actually wrestles with profound moral questions</b></font></a></div></div></div></div><div class="byline story" style="margin-bottom: 0px; max-width: 350px; float: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a name="productDetails" id="productDetails" aria-hidden="true" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>By </b></font></a><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b><a href="https://www.alternet.org/authors/paul-rosenberg" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Paul Rosenberg</a> </b>/ <span class="field field-name-field-sources field-type-node-reference field-label-hidden"><span class="field-items"><span class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.salon.com/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold;">Salon</a></span></span></span></font></div></div><div class="byline story" style="margin-bottom: 0px; max-width: 350px; float: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="field field-name-field-sources field-type-node-reference field-label-hidden"><span class="field-items"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></span></span></div><div class="byline story" style="margin-bottom: 0px; max-width: 350px; float: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="field field-name-field-sources field-type-node-reference field-label-hidden"><span class="field-items"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></span></span></div><div class="byline story" style="margin-bottom: 0px; max-width: 350px; float: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span class="field field-name-field-sources field-type-node-reference field-label-hidden"><span class="field-items"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></span></span></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/are-trump-supporters-evil-or-just-wrong">https://www.alternet.org/are-trump-supporters-evil-or-just-wrong</a></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>A</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>re Donald Trump's supporters driven by immoral hatred, or simply shaped by moral codes that most liberals or leftists don't understand?</b> </span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">That question, phrased in more sophisticated and technical terms, has sharply divided political scientists ever since Trump's emergence on the scene -- and in fact long before that.</span></font></div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">More than a year after the violence in Charlottesville, just as midterm campaign rhetoric starts to heat up for, it's a useful moment to examine what's wrong with even the most intellectually serious attempts at the mode of political analysis known as both-sides-ism. What does a more realistic assessment might reveal about ideological motivations?</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">About a month after Donald Trump’s election, long before we had heard the phrase "very fine people on both sides, I </span><a href="https://www.salon.com/2016/12/04/the-moral-foundations-of-fascism-warring-psychological-theories-struggle-to-make-sense-of-hitler-mussolini-and-you-know-who/" target="blank" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none;">wrote a story here</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> </span><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">questioning the "good people on both sides" logic of Jonathan Haidt's "moral foundations theory,” or MFT</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, b</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">ased on a paper by Jeffrey Sinn and Matthew Hayes, “<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pops.12361/abstract" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">Replacing the Moral Foundations: An Evolutionary-Coalitional Theory of Liberal-Conservative Differences</a>.” It wasn’t the first time I’ve criticized MFT based on specific researchers' work (see <a href="https://www.salon.com/2015/03/05/the_right_has_fked_up_minds_meet_the_researcher_who_terrifies_gop_congress/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">here</a> and <a href="https://www.salon.com/2015/03/16/hidden_secrets_of_the_right_wing_brain_do_you_like_scott_walker_or_elizabeth_warren_new_research_explains_why/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">here</a>), but it was the most promising in terms of suggesting a compelling alternative approach. Now a new paper by Sinn goes a long way towards fleshing out that alternative and revealing its superior explanatory power.</span></font></p><div style="margin-bottom: 20px;"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In a nutshell, MFT claims that liberals think of morality in narrower, more individualistic terms (focused on such dichotomies as harm vs. care and fairness vs. reciprocity) than conservatives do. Conservatives are "good people" too, Haidt claims, but are concerned with a cluster of three "binding morality" issues, which he defines as "authority/respect," "in-group/loyalty" and "purity/sanctity."</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>It’s a tantalizing just-so story, satisfying to both conservatives, who feel liberals have disrespected them intellectually, and liberals, who want to be inclusive and fair-minded.</b></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But Haidt’s key claim that “liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral mechanisms (or foundations)” is contradicted by evidence that “moral judgment involves a common template grounded in perceived harm,” as detailed in “<a href="https://chelseaschein.web.unc.edu/files/2016/11/Unifying_Moral_Dyad.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">The Unifying Moral Dyad</a>,” by Chelsea Schein and Kurt Gray. Haidt also leaves a great deal unexplained, not least the question of where such values originally came from in our evolutionary past — as well as why and how they can veer into darkness, as they have clearly done with some of the support for Trump, and have done before in human history with distressing frequency and dreadful results.</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In contrast, Sinn and Hayes explain conservative values in more realistic evolutionary terms, reflecting the navigation of different sorts of threatened harm. Haidt's “binding morality" idea "underspecifies conservatism," in a crucial sense, Sinn told me. As he sees it, that morality "arose because it steeled coalitions against adversarial out-groups,” which also “blends in practice with a darker orientation specifically motivated to dominate and exploit vulnerable out-groups." (Sinn and Hayes' theory carries the somewhat unwieldy label of "evolutionary-coalitional theory," or ECT.) [// xeni kennedy kpfa early , 9/3 that racism supported all kinds of group/power relation eg econ, social, religious etc etc]</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This analysis draws on two well-studied ideological attitudes that overwhelm all other factors when it comes to explaining bias or bigotry. The former, “binding morality,” reflects the influence of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), while the <b>darker motivations Haidt overlooks reflect "social dominance orientation" (SDO). In other words, according to this analysis xenophobia and out-group demonization are a feature of "conservative values," not a bug.</b></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Haidt also "underspecifies liberalism," Sinn said, by giving it a limited, individualistic focus. But that’s only part of the picture, he noted. “Instead, ECT contends that liberalism reflects concern with a wider world, one that includes all people and extends morality to include the natural world.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There’s been no response to that critique so far, Sinn told me. Which is disturbing, given the way that Donald Trump’s gross immorality, reflected in far too many of his followers, poses obvious problems for MFT. As Sinn explained, via email, <b>MFT is now perceived as "established science," which makes it "tough to challenge." Why has that happened?</b></font></p><blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I think in part because it seems a more “progressive” or “enlightened” position to want to broaden the moral domain to recognize conservative morality as a real thing. Also, [MFT] tells a very easy to grasp, intuitive story about political differences (that seems non-judgmental) so it’s sort of hard to unseat. Ironically, I think liberals like it because it appeals to their universalism and tendency to want to respect diversity (in this case, ideological diversity). </font></p></blockquote><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But Sinn’s perspective doesn't require us to reject all conservative politics as immoral. Rather, it could guide us toward a more rational, equitable way of balancing competing ideological perspectives. Liberal values of universalism and respect for diversity can still be honored, but not in a framework built simplistically on a just-so story.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">As Sinn and Hayes have argued in <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/pops.12475" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">another recent paper</a>, the values now identified as right-wing authoritarianism and social-dominance orientation may have provided evolutionary advantages in our past. But the dark side of those values, which we still carry with us as a species, is something we need to struggle with, overcome, and repurpose. We will need the insights and guidance provided by liberals' more universalistic view to guide us in that process.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In Sinn’s <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-018-0165-5" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">new paper</a>, he builds a more comprehensive account of ideological motivations in two ways. First, he’s strengthened his criticism of MFT by drawing on a larger framework for mapping ideology known as the <b>Schwartz Value Theory Circumplex.</b> This was originally based on data from 20 countries, and first <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260108602816?via%3Dihub" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">reported in 1992 by Shalom Schwartz</a>. In <a href="https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol2/iss1/11/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">a review article</a> 20 years later, now drawing on data from 82 countries, Schwartz explained:</font></p><blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The theory identifies ten basic personal values that are recognized across cultures and explains where they come from. At the heart of the theory is the idea that values form a circular structure that reflects the motivations each value expresses. This circular structure, that captures the conflicts and compatibility among the ten values is apparently culturally universal.</font></p></blockquote><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sinn proposes situating the ideologies he’s previously discussed — along with libertarianism — within the SVT circumplex framework like this:</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;" /><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>Second</b>, Sinn draws on a larger repertory of evolutionary processes — based on life history theory, signaling theory, parent-offspring conflict and more — to account for greater refinement of ideological differences, and strengthen the perspective of seeing ideologies change over time. In doing so, he lays out significant foundations for a much more robust analytical response to the experience of Trumpism.</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Trump’s emergence doesn’t just challenge MFT’s presumptions about conservative morality.</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> As described by a paper just presented at the American Political Science Association’s annual meeting (“</span><a href="https://convention2.allacademic.com/one/apsa/apsa18/index.php?program_focus=view_paper&selected_paper_id=1383087&cmd=online_program_direct_link&sub_action=online_program" target="blank" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none;">The Problem of Donald Trump and the Static Spectrum Fallacy</a><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">”), </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Trump’s</span></font></p><blockquote><p style="margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">reconfiguration of conservatism (not historically unique, by any means) exposes an even more fundamental problem: how to account for ideological coherence and differences in the face of repeated, sometimes sudden and drastic, issue-level change.</font></p></blockquote><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Sinn’s new paper doesn’t directly address this, but his discussion of the multiple ways ideological attitudes can evolve over time represents a more promising perspective for making sense of what’s otherwise a deeply confusing political moment. In addition, Sinn drew my attention to <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1047840X.2016.1111121" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none;">another paper</a> by the aforementioned Chelsea Schein and Kurt Gray, which points toward a more general evolutionary dynamic that can plausibly operate on a variety of time-scales, sometimes with great rapidity.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 22px; line-height: 32px !important;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">....</font></p></div></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">tedtalks</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">2008 </font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind">https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind</a></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">2016</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_can_a_divided_america_heal">https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_can_a_divided_america_heal</a></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div><div><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="http://righteousmind.com/" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://righteousmind.com/&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QFghEMAE" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">The Righteous Mind | Why Good People are Divided by Politics and ...</font></a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">righteousmind.com/</cite></font><div class="action-menu ab_ctl" style="display: inline; position: relative; margin: 1px 3px 0px; user-select: none; vertical-align: middle;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a class="GHDvEf ab_button" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=haidt&oq=haidt&aqs=chrome..69i57.2800j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#" id="am-b1" aria-label="Result Options" aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" role="button" jsaction="m.tdd;keydown:m.hbke;keypress:m.mskpe" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8Q7B0IRTAB" style="border-radius: 0px; cursor: default; font-weight: bold; height: 12px; line-height: 27px; margin: 1px 0px 2px; min-width: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; transition: none; user-select: none; background-image: none; border: 0px; box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px 0px; filter: none; width: 13px; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block;"><span class="mn-dwn-arw" style="border-color: rgb(0, 102, 33) transparent; border-style: solid; border-width: 5px 4px 0px; width: 0px; height: 0px; margin-left: 3px; top: 7.5px; margin-top: -4px; position: absolute; left: 0px;" /></a></font><div class="action-menu-panel ab_dropdown" role="menu" tabindex="-1" jsaction="keydown:m.hdke;mouseover:m.hdhne;mouseout:m.hdhue" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QqR8IRjAB" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; border: 1px solid rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2); padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: auto; top: 12px; z-index: 3; transition: opacity 0.218s; box-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2) 0px 2px 4px; left: 0px; visibility: hidden;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><ol style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a class="fl" href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:JqoYG6P6ecUJ:righteousmind.com/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search%3Fq%3Dcache:JqoYG6P6ecUJ:righteousmind.com/%2B%26cd%3D2%26hl%3Den%26ct%3Dclnk%26gl%3Dus&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QIAhHMAE" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;" /></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></li><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:righteousmind.com/+haidt&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QHwhIMAE" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;" /></li></ol></div></div></div><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:righteousmind.com/+haidt&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QHwhIMAE" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;"><span class="st" style="line-height: 1.4; word-wrap: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Jonathan <span style="font-weight: bold;">Haidt's</span> YouTube Channel · Why The Righteous Mind may be the best common reading for incoming college students · How not to improve the moral ...</font></span></a><div class="osl" style="margin-top: 0px;"><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:righteousmind.com/+haidt&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QHwhIMAE" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"></font></a><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a class="fl" href="http://righteousmind.com/about-the-author/" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://righteousmind.com/about-the-author/&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8Q0gIISigAMAE" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer;">About The Author</a> · <a class="fl" href="http://righteousmind.com/about-the-book/" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://righteousmind.com/about-the-book/&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8Q0gIISygBMAE" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer;">About the Book</a> · <a class="fl" href="http://righteousmind.com/buy-the-book/" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://righteousmind.com/buy-the-book/&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8Q0gIITCgCMAE" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer;">Buy The Book</a> · <a class="fl" href="http://righteousmind.com/applying-moral-psych/" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://righteousmind.com/applying-moral-psych/&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8Q0gIITSgDMAE" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer;">Applying Moral Psych</a></font></div><div class="osl" style="margin-top: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div></div></div><div><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="128" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QFQiAASgAMA4"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="http://people.stern.nyu.edu/jhaidt/" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://people.stern.nyu.edu/jhaidt/&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QFgiBATAO" style="cursor: pointer;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">Haidt's Home Page - NYU</font></a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">people.stern.nyu.edu/jhaidt/</cite></font><div class="action-menu ab_ctl" style="display: inline; position: relative; margin: 1px 3px 0px; user-select: none; vertical-align: middle;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a class="GHDvEf ab_button" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=haidt&oq=haidt&aqs=chrome..69i57.2800j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#" id="am-b14" aria-label="Result Options" aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" role="button" jsaction="m.tdd;keydown:m.hbke;keypress:m.mskpe" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8Q7B0IggEwDg" style="border-radius: 0px; cursor: default; font-weight: bold; height: 12px; line-height: 27px; margin: 1px 0px 2px; min-width: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; transition: none; user-select: none; background-image: none; border: 0px; box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px 0px; filter: none; width: 13px; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block;"><span class="mn-dwn-arw" style="border-color: rgb(0, 102, 33) transparent; border-style: solid; border-width: 5px 4px 0px; width: 0px; height: 0px; margin-left: 3px; top: 7.5px; margin-top: -4px; position: absolute; left: 0px;" /></a></font><div class="action-menu-panel ab_dropdown" role="menu" tabindex="-1" jsaction="keydown:m.hdke;mouseover:m.hdhne;mouseout:m.hdhue" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QqR8IgwEwDg" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; border: 1px solid rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2); padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: auto; top: 12px; z-index: 3; transition: opacity 0.218s; box-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2) 0px 2px 4px; left: 0px; visibility: hidden;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><ol style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a class="fl" href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:pNFdrZebR7sJ:people.stern.nyu.edu/jhaidt/+&cd=15&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search%3Fq%3Dcache:pNFdrZebR7sJ:people.stern.nyu.edu/jhaidt/%2B%26cd%3D15%26hl%3Den%26ct%3Dclnk%26gl%3Dus&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QIAiEATAO" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;" /></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></li><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:people.stern.nyu.edu/jhaidt/+haidt&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QHwiFATAO" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;" /></li></ol></div></div></div><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:people.stern.nyu.edu/jhaidt/+haidt&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QHwiFATAO" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;"><span class="st" style="line-height: 1.4; word-wrap: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="f" style="">May 20, 2016 - </span>Jonathan <span style="font-weight: bold;">Haidt's</span> homepage on moral political psychology.</font></span></a></div><div jsl="$t t--ddbPTeIsNI;$x 0;" class="r-iXsrSx5cbYX8" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8Q2Z0BCIcBMA4"><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="143" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QFQiPASgBMA8"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/the-righteous-mind-by-jonathan-haidt.html" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/the-righteous-mind-by-jonathan-haidt.html&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QFgiQATAP" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">'The Righteous Mind,' by Jonathan Haidt - The New York Times</font></a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/.../the-righteous-mind-by-jonathan-haidt.html</font></cite></div><span class="st" style="line-height: 1.4; word-wrap: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="f" style="">Mar 23, 2012 - </span><span style="font-weight: bold;">Haidt</span> seems to delight in mischief. Drawing on ethnography, evolutionary theory and experimental psychology, he sets out to trash the modern ...</font></span></div><div jsl="$t t--ddbPTeIsNI;$x 0;" class="r-i8FeJ3kmYXzE" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8Q2Z0BCJIBMA8"><div class="g" style="line-height: 1.2; margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 26px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div data-hveid="154" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QFQiaASgCMBA"><div class="rc" style="position: relative;"><h3 class="r" style="font-weight: normal; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QFgibATAQ" style="cursor: pointer; text-decoration-line: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and ...</font></a></h3><div class="s" style="max-width: 48em; line-height: 18px;"><div class="f hJND5c TbwUpd" style="height: 18px; line-height: 16px; white-space: nowrap;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><cite class="iUh30" style="font-style: normal;">https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/.../0307455777</cite></font><div class="action-menu ab_ctl" style="display: inline; position: relative; margin: 1px 3px 0px; user-select: none; vertical-align: middle;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a class="GHDvEf ab_button" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=haidt&oq=haidt&aqs=chrome..69i57.2800j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#" id="am-b16" aria-label="Result Options" aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" role="button" jsaction="m.tdd;keydown:m.hbke;keypress:m.mskpe" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8Q7B0InAEwEA" style="border-radius: 0px; cursor: default; font-weight: bold; height: 12px; line-height: 27px; margin: 1px 0px 2px; min-width: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; transition: none; user-select: none; background-image: none; border: 0px; box-shadow: 0px 0px 0px 0px; filter: none; width: 13px; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block;"><span class="mn-dwn-arw" style="border-color: rgb(0, 102, 33) transparent; border-style: solid; border-width: 5px 4px 0px; width: 0px; height: 0px; margin-left: 3px; top: 7.5px; margin-top: -4px; position: absolute; left: 0px;" /></a></font><div class="action-menu-panel ab_dropdown" role="menu" tabindex="-1" jsaction="keydown:m.hdke;mouseover:m.hdhne;mouseout:m.hdhue" data-ved="0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QqR8InQEwEA" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; border: 1px solid rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2); padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: auto; top: 12px; z-index: 3; transition: opacity 0.218s; box-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.2) 0px 2px 4px; left: 0px; visibility: hidden;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><ol style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a class="fl" href="https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vMeLMxGdaZ4J:https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777+&cd=17&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us" ping="/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search%3Fq%3Dcache:vMeLMxGdaZ4J:https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777%2B%26cd%3D17%26hl%3Den%26ct%3Dclnk%26gl%3Dus&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QIAieATAQ" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;" /></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></li><li class="action-menu-item ab_dropdownitem" role="menuitem" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; list-style: none; user-select: none; cursor: pointer;"><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777+haidt&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QHwifATAQ" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;" /></li></ol></div></div></div><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777+haidt&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QHwifATAQ" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;"><span class="st" style="line-height: 1.4; word-wrap: break-word;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion [<wbr />Jonathan <span style="font-weight: bold;">Haidt</span>] on Amazon.com. FREE shipping on qualifying offers. New York<wbr /> ...</font></span></a></div></div></div></div><div><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777+haidt&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QHwifATAQ" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">
</font></a></div><div><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777+haidt&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QHwifATAQ" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">=</font></a></div><div><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a class="fl" href="https://www.google.com/search?q=related:https://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/0307455777+haidt&tbo=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi907zUnpXcAhVQZKwKHbAcDg8QHwifATAQ" style="text-decoration-line: none; cursor: pointer; display: block; padding: 7px 18px; outline: 0px;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" color="#000000"><b>Jonathan David Haidt</b> (<span class="nowrap" style="white-space: nowrap;"><span class="IPA nopopups noexcerpt" /></span></font></a><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/English" title="Help:IPA/English" style="background: none; text-decoration-line: none !important;">/<span style="border-bottom: 1px dotted;"><span title="'h' in 'hi'">h</span><span title="/aɪ/: 'i' in 'tide'">aɪ</span><span title="'t' in 'tie'">t</span></span>/</a>; born October 19, 1963) is an American <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_psychologist" class="mw-redirect" title="Social psychologist" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">social psychologist</a> and Professor of Ethical Leadership at <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_University" title="New York University" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">New York University</a>'s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern_School_of_Business" class="mw-redirect" title="Stern School of Business" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Stern School of Business</a>.<sup id="cite_ref-1" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-1" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[1]</a></sup> His academic specialization is the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_psychology" title="Moral psychology" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">psychology of morality</a> and the moral emotions. Haidt is the author of two books: <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Happiness_Hypothesis" title="The Happiness Hypothesis" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">The Happiness Hypothesis</a>: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom</i> (2006) and <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Righteous_Mind" title="The Righteous Mind" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">The Righteous Mind</a>: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion </i>(2012), which became a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times_Best_Seller_list" title="The New York Times Best Seller list" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><i>New York Times</i> bestseller</a>.<sup id="cite_ref-2" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-2" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[2]</a></sup> He was named one of the "top global thinkers" by <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Policy" title="Foreign Policy" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Foreign Policy</a></i> magazine,<sup id="cite_ref-3" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-3" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[3]</a></sup> and one of the "top world thinkers" by <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prospect(magazine)" title="Prospect (magazine)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Prospect</a></i> magazine.<sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-4" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[4]</a></sup></font></p><div id="toc" class="toc" style="border: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); background-color: rgb(248, 249, 250); padding: 7px; display: table; zoom: 1;"><div class="toctitle" lang="en" dir="ltr" style="direction: ltr; text-align: center;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><h2 style="background: none; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border: 0px; display: inline; line-height: 1.3;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Contents</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></h2><span class="toctoggle" style="user-select: none;"> [<a role="button" tabindex="0" class="togglelink" style="background: none; cursor: pointer;">hide</a>] </span></div><ul style="list-style-type: none; margin: 0.3em 0px; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Education_and_career" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">1</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Education and career</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-2" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Research_contributions" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">2</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Research contributions</span></font></a><ul style="list-style-type: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 2em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-3" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Social_intuitionism" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">2.1</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Social intuitionism</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-4" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Moral_disgust" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">2.2</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Moral disgust</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-5" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Moral_elevation" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">2.3</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Moral elevation</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-6" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Moral_foundations_theory" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">2.4</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Moral foundations theory</span></font></a></li></ul></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-7" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Elephant_and_rider_metaphor" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">3</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Elephant and rider metaphor</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-8" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Political_centrism" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">4</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Political centrism</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-9" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Criticism" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">5</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Criticism</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-10" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Works" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">6</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Works</span></font></a><ul style="list-style-type: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 2em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: none;"><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-11" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Books" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">6.1</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Books</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-12" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Selected_publications" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">6.2</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">Selected publications</span></font></a></li></ul></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-13" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#References" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">7</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">References</span></font></a></li><li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-14" style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#External_links" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><span class="tocnumber" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em;">8</span><span class="toctext" style="display: table-cell; text-decoration: inherit;">External links</span></font></a></li></ul></div><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Education_and_career">Education and career</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=1&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Education and career" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h2><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Haidt was born in New York City and raised in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarsdale" class="mw-redirect" title="Scarsdale" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Scarsdale</a>, New York, to a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Judaism(North_America)" class="mw-redirect" title="Reform Judaism (North America)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">liberal</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish" class="mw-redirect" title="Jewish" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Jewish</a> family.<sup id="cite_ref-5" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-5" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[5]</a></sup><sup id="cite_ref-6" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-6" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[6]</a></sup> He earned a BA in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy" title="Philosophy" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">philosophy</a> from <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_University" title="Yale University" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Yale University</a> in 1985, and a PhD in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology" title="Psychology" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">psychology</a> from the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Pennsylvania" title="University of Pennsylvania" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">University of Pennsylvania</a> in 1992. He then studied <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_psychology" title="Cultural psychology" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">cultural psychology</a> at the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Chicago" title="University of Chicago" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">University of Chicago</a> as a post-doctoral fellow. His supervisors were <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Baron" title="Jonathan Baron" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Jonathan Baron</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Fiske" title="Alan Fiske" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Alan Fiske</a> (at the University of Pennsylvania) and cultural anthropologist <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Shweder" title="Richard Shweder" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Richard Shweder</a> (University of Chicago). During his post-doctoral appointment, Haidt won a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulbright_Fellowship" class="mw-redirect" title="Fulbright Fellowship" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Fulbright fellowship</a> to fund three months of research on morality in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orissa,India" class="mw-redirect" title="Orissa, India" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Orissa, India</a>. In 1995, Haidt was hired as an <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assistant_Professor" class="mw-redirect" title="Assistant Professor" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">assistant professor</a> at the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Virginia" title="University of Virginia" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">University of Virginia</a>, where he worked until 2011, winning four awards for teaching, including a statewide award conferred by the Governor of Virginia.<sup id="cite_ref-7" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-7" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[7]</a></sup></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In 1999, Haidt became active in the new field of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_psychology" title="Positive psychology" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">positive psychology</a>, studying positive moral emotions. This work led to the publication of an edited volume, titled <i>Flourishing</i>, in 2003, and then to <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Happiness_Hypothesis" title="The Happiness Hypothesis" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">The Happiness Hypothesis</a> </i>in 2006. <i>The</i> <i>Happiness Hypothesis</i> introduced the widely cited metaphor that the mind is divided into parts, like a small rider (conscious reasoning) on a very large elephant (automatic and intuitive processes). In 2004, Haidt began to apply moral psychology to the study of politics, doing research on the psychological foundations of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology" title="Ideology" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">ideology</a>. This work led to the publication in 2012 of <i>The Righteous Mind</i>. Haidt spent the 2007–2008 academic year at <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princeton_University" title="Princeton University" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Princeton University</a>as the Laurance S. Rockefeller Visiting Professor for Distinguished Teaching.</font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">In 2011, Haidt moved to the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_University_Stern_School_of_Business" title="New York University Stern School of Business" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">New York University Stern School of Business</a>. Haidt's current research applies moral psychology to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_ethics" title="Business ethics" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">business ethics</a>. In 2013, he co-founded Ethical Systems,<sup id="cite_ref-8" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-8" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[8]</a></sup> a non-profit collaboration dedicated to making academic research on ethics widely available to businesses. He is also engaged in efforts to foster greater political civility<sup id="cite_ref-9" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-9" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[9]</a></sup> and to increase the ideological diversity of social psychology and other social sciences.<sup id="cite_ref-10" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-10" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[10]</a></sup> Haidt is writing a book on <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism" title="Capitalism" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">capitalism</a> that will be published in 2019.<sup id="cite_ref-11" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-11" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[11]</a></sup></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Haidt is a co-founder of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterodox_Academy" title="Heterodox Academy" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Heterodox Academy</a>,<sup id="cite_ref-AcademyProblem_12-0" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-AcademyProblem-12" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[12]</a></sup> and Ethical Systems<sup id="cite_ref-Ethical_Systems_13-0" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-Ethical_Systems-13" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[13]</a></sup> as well as YourMorals.org,<sup id="cite_ref-YourMorals.org_14-0" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-YourMorals.org-14" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[14]</a></sup> and CivilPolitics.org<sup id="cite_ref-CivilPolitcs.org_15-0" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-CivilPolitcs.org-15" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[15]</a></sup>.</font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Haidt has signed the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-Truth_Pledge" title="Pro-Truth Pledge" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Pro-Truth Pledge</a> <sup id="cite_ref-16" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-16" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[16]</a></sup></font></p><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Research_contributions">Research contributions</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=2&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Research contributions" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h2><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt's research on morality has led to publications and theoretical advances in four primary areas:</font></p><h3 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom: 0px; line-height: 1.6;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Social_intuitionism">Social intuitionism</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=3&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Social intuitionism" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h3><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Haidt's principal line of research since graduate school has been on the nature and mechanisms of moral judgment. In the 1990s, he developed the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_intuitionism" title="Social intuitionism" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">social intuitionist model</a>, which posits that moral judgment is mostly based on automatic processes–moral intuitions–rather than on conscious reasoning. People engage in reasoning largely to find evidence to support their initial intuitions. Haidt's main paper on the social intuitionist model, "The Emotional Dog and its Rational Tail", has been cited over 6,000 times.<sup id="cite_ref-17" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-17" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[17]</a></sup></font></p><h3 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom: 0px; line-height: 1.6;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Moral_disgust">Moral disgust</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=4&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Moral disgust" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h3><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Together with <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Rozin" title="Paul Rozin" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Paul Rozin</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clark_McCauley" title="Clark McCauley" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Clark McCauley</a>, Haidt developed the Disgust Scale,<sup id="cite_ref-18" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-18" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[18]</a></sup> which has been widely used to measure individual differences in sensitivity to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgust" title="Disgust" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">disgust</a>. Haidt, Rozin, and McCauley have written extensively on the psychology of disgust as an emotion that began as a guardian of the mouth (against pathogens), but then expanded during biological and cultural evolution to become a guardian of the body more generally, and of the social and moral order.<sup id="cite_ref-19" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-19" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[19]</a></sup></font></p><h3 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom: 0px; line-height: 1.6;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Moral_elevation">Moral elevation</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=5&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Moral elevation" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h3><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">With Sara Algoe, Haidt argued that exposure to stories about moral beauty (the opposite of moral disgust) cause a common set of responses, including warm, loving feelings, calmness, and a desire to become a better person.<sup id="cite_ref-20" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-20" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[20]</a></sup> Haidt called the emotion <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevation(emotion)" title="Elevation (emotion)" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">"moral elevation"</a>,<sup id="cite_ref-21" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-21" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[21]</a></sup> as a tribute to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson" title="Thomas Jefferson" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Thomas Jefferson</a>, who had described the emotion in detail in a letter discussing the benefits of reading great literature.<sup id="cite_ref-22" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-22" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[22]</a></sup> Feelings of moral elevation cause lactation in breast-feeding mothers,<sup id="cite_ref-23" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-23" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[23]</a></sup> suggesting the involvement of the hormone <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxytocin" title="Oxytocin" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">oxytocin</a>. There is now a large body of research on elevation and related emotions.<sup id="cite_ref-24" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-24" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[24]</a></sup></font></p><h3 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom: 0px; line-height: 1.6;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Moral_foundations_theory">Moral foundations theory</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=6&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Moral foundations theory" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h3><div role="note" class="hatnote navigation-not-searchable" style="font-style: italic; padding-left: 1.6em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Main article: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_foundations_theory" title="Moral foundations theory" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Moral foundations theory</a></font></div><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">In 2004, Haidt began to extend the social intuitionist model to specify the most important categories of moral intuition.<sup id="cite_ref-25" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-25" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[25]</a></sup> The result was <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_foundations_theory" title="Moral foundations theory" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">moral foundations theory</a>, co-developed with Craig Joseph and Jesse Graham, and based in part on the writings of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Shweder" title="Richard Shweder" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Richard Shweder</a>. The theory posits that there are (at least) six innate moral foundations, upon which cultures develop their various moralities, just as there are five innate <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taste_receptor" title="Taste receptor" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">taste receptors</a>on the tongue, which cultures have used to create many different cuisines. The six are care/harm, fairness (equality)/cheating, liberty/oppression, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, and sanctity/degradation. The theory was developed to explain cross-cultural differences in morality, but Haidt and his collaborators at YourMorals.org<sup id="cite_ref-26" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-26" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[26]</a></sup> have found that the theory works well to explain political differences as well. Liberals (leftists) tend to endorse primarily the care and equality foundations, whereas conservatives (rightists) tend to endorse all six foundations more equally.<sup id="cite_ref-27" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-27" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[27]</a></sup></font></p><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Elephant_and_rider_metaphor">Elephant and rider metaphor</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=7&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Elephant and rider metaphor" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h2><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">The observations of social intuitionism–that intuitions come first and rationalization second–led to the elephant and rider metaphor.<sup id="cite_ref-28" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-28" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[28]</a></sup> The rider represents the conscious controlled processes and the elephant represents all of the automatic processes. The metaphor corresponds to Systems 1 and 2 described in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Kahneman" title="Daniel Kahneman" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Daniel Kahneman</a>'s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,Fast_and_Slow#Two_systems" title="Thinking, Fast and Slow" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><i>Thinking, Fast and Slow</i></a>.<sup id="cite_ref-29" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-29" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[29]</a></sup> This metaphor is used extensively in both <i>The Happiness Hypothesis</i> and <i>The Righteous Mind</i>.</font></p><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Political_centrism">Political centrism</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=8&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Political centrism" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h2><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">In chapter 8 of <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Righteous_Mind" title="The Righteous Mind" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">The Righteous Mind</a></i>, Haidt describes how he began to study political psychology in order to help the Democratic Party win more elections. But in chapter 12 of <i>The Righteous Mind</i> Haidt argues that each of the major political groups – conservatives, progressives, and libertarians—have valuable insights and that truth and good policy emerge from the contest of ideas. Since 2012 Haidt has referred to himself as a political centrist.<sup id="cite_ref-30" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-30" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[30]</a></sup> Haidt is involved with several efforts to help bridge the political divide and reduce political polarization in the United States. In 2007 He founded the website CivilPolitics.org, a clearinghouse for research on political civility. He serves on the advisory boards of Represent.Us., a non-partisan anticorruption organization, the Acumen Fund, which invests in companies, leaders, and ideas that are changing the way the world tackles poverty and Better-Angels.org, a bipartisan group working to reduce political polarization. Three of his four TED talks are on the topic of understanding and reducing political divisions.</font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">His 2012 TED talk on “How common threats can make common ground”<sup id="cite_ref-31" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-31" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[31]</a></sup> introduced a set of ideas on how to use moral psychology to foster collaboration among partisan opponents. This talk became the basis of a bipartisan working group of poverty researchers, which Haidt helped to convene, under the auspices of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Enterprise_Institute" title="American Enterprise Institute" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">American Enterprise Institute</a> and the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brookings_Institution" title="Brookings Institution" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Brookings Institution</a>.<sup id="cite_ref-32" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-32" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[32]</a></sup> In 2015 the working group published a report titled: Opportunity, responsibility, and security: A consensus plan for reducing poverty and restoring the American dream.<sup id="cite_ref-33" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-33" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[33]</a></sup></font></p><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Criticism">Criticism</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=9&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Criticism" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h2><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">In chapter 9 of <i>The Happiness Hypothesis</i>, Haidt extends a comprehensive inquiry on the role of religion in society concluding that the scientific community should recognize the evolutionary origins of religiosity and accept its potential benefits.<sup id="cite_ref-34" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-34" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[34]</a></sup> Other scientists and philosophers disagree with Haidt's generally positive opinion about religiosity as evidenced in an online debate sponsored by the website <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_Foundation,Inc." title="Edge Foundation, Inc." style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Edge</a></i>.<sup id="cite_ref-35" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-35" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[35]</a></sup></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Social psychologist <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Jost" title="John Jost" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">John Jost</a> wrote that Haidt "mocks the liberal vision of a tolerant, pluralistic, civil society, but, ironically, this is precisely where he wants to end up."<sup id="cite_ref-36" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-36" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[36]</a></sup></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Journalist <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Hedges" title="Chris Hedges" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Chris Hedges</a> wrote a review of <i>The Righteous Mind</i> in which he accused Haidt of supporting "social Darwinism".<sup id="cite_ref-37" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-37" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[37]</a></sup> In his response, Haidt disagreed with Hedges's reading of the book, most notably that Hedges took quotations from conservatives and inappropriately attributed them to Haidt.<sup id="cite_ref-38" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-38" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[38]</a></sup></font></p><p style="margin: 0.5em 0px; line-height: inherit; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">Recently, Haidt has co-written some articles for newspapers and magazines about campus culture at American universities which have received mixed reactions, such as "The Coddling of the American Mind"<sup id="cite_ref-39" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-39" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[39]</a></sup><sup id="cite_ref-40" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-40" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[40]</a></sup><sup id="cite_ref-41" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-41" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[41]</a></sup>and "Hard Truths About Race on Campus" <sup id="cite_ref-42" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-42" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[42]</a></sup><sup id="cite_ref-43" class="reference" style="line-height: 1; unicode-bidi: isolate; white-space: nowrap;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#cite_note-43" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">[43]</a></sup></font></p><table class="plainlinks metadata ambox mbox-small-left ambox-content" role="presentation" style="margin: 4px 1em 4px 0px; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 10px; border-style: solid; border-color: rgb(162, 169, 177) rgb(162, 169, 177) rgb(162, 169, 177) rgb(242, 133, 0); border-image: initial; background: rgb(251, 251, 251); box-sizing: border-box; overflow: hidden; width: 238px; border-collapse: collapse; line-height: 1.25em;"><tbody><tr><td class="mbox-image" style="border: none; padding: 2px 0px 2px 0.5em; text-align: center;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg" class="image" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000"><img alt="[icon]" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg/20px-Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg.png" width="20" height="14" srcset="//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg/30px-Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg.png 1.5x, //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg/40px-Wiki_letter_w_cropped.svg.png 2x" data-file-width="44" data-file-height="31" style="border: 0px; vertical-align: middle;" /></font></a></td><td class="mbox-text" style="border: none; padding: 0.25em 0.5em; width: 187.688px;"><div class="mbox-text-span"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">This section <b>needs expansion</b>. <small style="">You can help by <a class="external text" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none !important; padding: 0px !important;">adding to it</a>.</small> <small style=""><i>(August 2016)</i></small></font></div></td></tr></tbody></table><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Works">Works</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=10&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Works" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h2><h3 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom: 0px; line-height: 1.6;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Books">Books</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=11&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Books" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h3><ul style="margin: 0.3em 0px 0px 1.6em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: url(" data:image="data:image" svg="svg" xml="xml" csvg="Csvg" width="%225%22" height="%2213%22%3E" ccircle="Ccircle" cx="%222.5%22" cy="%229.5%22" r="%222.5%22" fill="%22%2300528c%22/%3E" c="C" e="E" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" xmlns="%22http://www.w3.org/2000/svg%22" xmlns:data="data"><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><cite class="citation book" style="font-style: inherit; word-wrap: break-word;">Haidt, Jonathan; Keyes, Corey L.M. (2002). <i>Flourishing: Positive Psychology and the Life Well Lived</i>. Washington, DC: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Psychological_Association" title="American Psychological Association" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">American Psychological Association</a>. p. 335. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Book_Number" title="International Standard Book Number" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">ISBN</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-1-55798-930-7" title="Special:BookSources/978-1-55798-930-7" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">978-1-55798-930-7</a>.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle=Flourishing%3A+Positive+Psychology+and+the+Life+Well+Lived.&rft.place=Washington%2C+DC&rft.pages=335&rft.pub=American+Psychological+Association&rft.date=2002&rft.isbn=978-1-55798-930-7&rft.aulast=Haidt&rft.aufirst=Jonathan&rft.au=Keyes%2C+Corey+L.M.&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AJonathan+Haidt" class="Z3988" /></font></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><cite class="citation book" style="font-style: inherit; word-wrap: break-word;">Haidt, Jonathan (2006). <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Happiness_Hypothesis" title="The Happiness Hypothesis" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">The Happiness Hypothesis</a>: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom</i>. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Books" title="Basic Books" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Basic Books</a>. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Book_Number" title="International Standard Book Number" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">ISBN</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0-465-02802-0" title="Special:BookSources/0-465-02802-0" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">0-465-02802-0</a>.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle=The+Happiness+Hypothesis%3A+Finding+Modern+Truth+in+Ancient+Wisdom&rft.pub=Basic+Books&rft.date=2006&rft.isbn=0-465-02802-0&rft.aulast=Haidt&rft.aufirst=Jonathan&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AJonathan+Haidt" class="Z3988" /></font></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><cite id="CITEREFHaidt2012" class="citation book" style="font-style: inherit; word-wrap: break-word;">Haidt, Jonathan (2012). <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Righteous_Mind" title="The Righteous Mind" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">The Righteous Mind</a>: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion</i>. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheon_Books" title="Pantheon Books" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">Pantheon</a>. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Standard_Book_Number" title="International Standard Book Number" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">ISBN</a> <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-307-37790-6" title="Special:BookSources/978-0-307-37790-6" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">978-0-307-37790-6</a>.</cite><span title="ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle=The+Righteous+Mind%3A+Why+Good+People+Are+Divided+by+Politics+and+Religion&rft.pub=Pantheon&rft.date=2012&rft.isbn=978-0-307-37790-6&rft.aulast=Haidt&rft.aufirst=Jonathan&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fen.wikipedia.org%3AJonathan+Haidt" class="Z3988" /></font></li></ul><h3 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0.3em 0px 0px; overflow: hidden; padding-top: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; border-bottom: 0px; line-height: 1.6;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span class="mw-headline" id="Selected_publications">Selected publications</span><span class="mw-editsection" style="user-select: none; font-weight: normal; margin-left: 1em; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1em; white-space: nowrap; unicode-bidi: isolate;"><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-right: 0.25em;">[</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jonathan_Haidt&action=edit§ion=12&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro" title="Edit section: Selected publications" style="text-decoration-line: none; background: none;">edit</a><span class="mw-editsection-bracket" style="margin-left: 0.25em;">]</span></span></font></h3><ul style="margin: 0.3em 0px 0px 1.6em; padding: 0px; list-style-image: url(" data:image="data:image" svg="svg" xml="xml" csvg="Csvg" width="%225%22" height="%2213%22%3E" ccircle="Ccircle" cx="%222.5%22" cy="%229.5%22" r="%222.5%22" fill="%22%2300528c%22/%3E" c="C" e="E" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" xmlns="%22http://www.w3.org/2000/svg%22" xmlns:data="data"><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt, J., Koller, S., & Dias, M. (1993). Affect, culture, and morality, or is it wrong to eat your dog? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 613-628.</font></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt, J . (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review. 108, 814-834.</font></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Wheatley, T., & Haidt, J. (2005). Hypnotic disgust makes moral judgments more severe. Psychological Science, 16, 780-784.</font></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt, J. (2007). The new synthesis in moral psychology. Science, 316, 998-1002.</font></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Rozin, P., Haidt, J., & McCauley, C. R. (2008). Disgust. In M. Lewis, J. Haviland, & L. F. Barrett (Eds.) Handbook of emotions, 3rd edition. (pp. 757–776). New York: Guilford Press.</font></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 1029–1046.</font></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Haidt, J., & Kesebir, S. (2010). Morality. In S. Fiske, D. Gilbert, & G. Lindzey (Eds.) Handbook of Social Psychology, 5th Edition. Hobeken, NJ: Wiley. pp. 797–832.</font></li><li style="margin-bottom: 0.1em;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Iyer, R., Koleva, S. P., Graham, J., Ditto, P. H., & Haidt, J. (2012). Understanding Libertarian morality: The psychological dispositions of self-identified libertarians. PLoS ONE 7:e42366 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0042366.</font></li></ul><h2 style="background: none rgb(255, 255, 255); font-weight: normal; margin: 1em 0px 0.25em; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(162, 169, 177); line-height: 1.3;"><span class="mw-headline" id="References"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">References</font></span></h2></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>