jonathan haidt the righteous mind summary

We’ll listen to them because we are social creatures who are desperate for the approval of our peers. We only change our minds when people we respect talk to and appeal to our intuition.

Moral reasoning is thus not a search for any empirical truth as much as it is a method by which we justify our moral decisions. The rider, or reason, can occasionally affect the elephant’s path a bit, but it’s mostly there to explain the decisions of the elephant after the elephant makes them. The elephant, which represents intuition, makes most of the decisions, guiding itself and the rider in different directions in response to all of the stimuli it takes in. The human mind functions something like an elephant with a rider on top. If morality is largely a cultural construct, do intuition or rationality play any part in moral decision-making? Yes, but their roles may surprise you. This shows that, contrary to what many people think, morality isn’t innate. For example, in a sociocentric society, it might be morally wrong to move away from your family to pursue a promotion, whereas this is expected in an individualistic society. Individualistic and sociocentric societies make different moral judgments. However, most societies subordinate the needs of the individual to the needs of the group-they are sociocentric. In individualistic societies, the role of society is to serve the individual. The individualistic society, in which Westerners live now, is a product of the relatively recent Enlightenment. For example, Westerners are unique in their prioritization of individual rights over the common good. One of the most common answers is that morality is innate. The question of where morality comes from has plagued scholars for centuries.

To understand why morality is primarily intuitive, we first need to understand how morality evolved. Principle #1: Morality Is More Intuitive Than Rational Morality’s Origins

Morality is about more than fairness and harm.

Morality is more intuitive than rational.

The Righteous Mind builds this argument on three basic principles: Consequently, liberals and conservatives lack a common language, and reason-based arguments about morality are ineffective. He argues that moral judgments are emotional, not logical-they are based on stories rather than reason. In The Righteous Mind, moral psychologist Jonathan Haidt explains why liberals, conservatives, and libertarians all have different understandings of right and wrong. 1-Page Summary 1-Page Book Summary of The Righteous Mind

Jonathan haidt the righteous mind summary