Jonathan Haidt: Leftism is the New Fundamentalist Religion

Jonathan David Haidt (born October 19, 1963) is an American social psychologist and Professor of Ethical Leadership at New York University's Stern School of Business. His academic specialization is the psychology of morality and the moral emotions. Haidt is the author of two books: The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom (2006) and The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion (2012).
He is also founder of the Heterodox Academy to support viewpoint diversity in academia: heterodoxacademy.org/
In this clip with Jordan Peterson he talks about how leftism is the new fundamentalit religion. Full clip, quoted under fair use: • The Perilous State of ...
---
This channel aims at extracting central points of presentations into short clips. The topics cover the problems of leftist ideology and the consequences for society. If you like the content, subscribe to the channel!

[@PhilosophyInsights]

I can highly recommend watching the full interview, which you can find on Jordan Peterson´s channel, here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/anqllpqClLtpd6M

[@BaronVonBlair]

PhilosophyInsights it's grrrrrreat!

[@PhilosophyInsights]

@phallic as fuck: I already made a thumbnail for this clip, then KZbin auto-recommended this picture, and his facial expression was just on point so I couldn't bring myself to use my thumbnail :D Also, I already have a Facebook page which you can find here: facebook.com/PhilosophyInsights-1392403627480197/

[@Oners82]

PhilosophyInsights Leftism is not new, there is nothing fundamentalist about it and it is not religious. The title is fucking stupid. And as for the guy in the video who says, "We are fundamentally religious creatures, we are built for religion" that is the statement of a person who has tunnel vision. I don't have a religious bone in my body, never have done. The idea is fundamentally idiotic to me that we should believe in miracles and shit based upon nothing but story books. MOST people are brought up in religious families and therefore MOST people are religious, that is of course true, but on the other hand people brought up in non-religious families do not have that urge to believe in fanciful tales. He is fundamentally just wrong and mistakes brain washing for human nature. The fact that most of his sources are extreme right wingers is also quite telling about his own personal biases.

[@wouterdeheus3626]

I think the title's wrong:Haidt is not talking about the left but about the fundamentalist left. I'm sick of extremist SJWs being associated with "the left" and then when people talk about the bad behaviour of some person it's because that person is "a leftist." There are also very reasonable and agreeable people who are left wing, they don't all have to be crazy neomarxists.

[@Oners82]

Wouter de Heus Although I agree with your general point, your use of the term "neoMarxist" would seem to suggest that you have been listening to too much of Jordan Peterson's BS. Marxists (or neoMarxists) are not crazy and they bear absolutely ZERO resemblance to Peterson's childish straw man of them. The ones that I have studied are highly intelligent scholars who simply do not think that capitalism has the resources to sustain itself because the inherent contradictions it contains, as well as the externalities it ignores, will inevitably bring it down either through economic, social or environmental disaster. Agree or disagree, but to dismiss these scholars as "crazy" based upon the smears of a right winger like Peterson (rather than an actual critique of their ideas) is a cheap shot at best. In fact it's just ad hominem, nothing more.

[@temujinthekhan6233]

As a liberal minded person, I am ecstatic about the work these men are doing to gut out bad ideas in the mainstream right now.

[@powertuber3.047]

The red pill is waiting... why not see things as they really are... before its too late.

[@snackentity5709]

This was 5 years ago... it's only gotten worse. Liberal academics like Haidt and Pinker are cast as unacceptably right-wing by the cult.

[@GungaLaGunga]

"The Righteous Mind" gives interesting break down what makes us liberal vs conservative.

[@Brikkwall]

I can't even have this conversation with anyone in my life, only online... How did this happen?

[@nostalgicgirrl6053]

I’m with you on this. You’re not alone

[@matrixlone]

Exactly what I've been saying..these people demonize you just because you don't believe in those doctrines of theirs

[@newgame7127]

The Left persecute critical thinking just like the Roman Catholic church did to scientists like Galileo in the Middle Ages. Leftism is the Wests religion. They even demand that you love your neighbour as yourself (as long as they're Muslim / Brown/ black or LGBTQWERTYUIOP)

[@johnmarshall4874]

the New Left multiculturalism IS a gosh darn Religion! the "original sin" is not The Fall of Adam and Eve it is the sin "racism" The atonement is self hatred of EVERY Indigenous white European society (English, Germany, Sweden, America, Netherlands) have to be deconstructed by this New Left Inquisition at the Universities, which is REAL RACISM against white Europeans if you think about it: one is a racist if one wants Norway to remain Norway - which ever other country of the face of the planet implicitly is set up for their people and don't want foreigners to pour in open borders, really think about it "Diversity" is a form of discrimination and racism to majority populations since the are de facto racist if not diverse - totally racist "Diversity" is. (Nazi is National Socialist Workers Party of Germany, so even a "white Supremacist" like John Wilkes Booth who murdered Lincoln can NOT be or ever be a Nazi. The Left is very ignorant in real history and scholarship ,they don't care about facts most "racism." book movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers was about the Collective of Communism, an is alive today.

[@OldGayGamer]

The left shames people for not following along with ideas. That is precisely how bad ideas grow and spread. See: religion.

[@vccancerkill5047]

J Steiner4791 oh wow you must read a lot

[@mytmouse57]

But the right does the same thing.

[@jl9205]

Haidt is dead on. Two amazing thinkers here.

[@normalizedinsanity4873]

I am amazed, gobsmaked,

[@ExistentialWill]

Nope, they are sophists and calculators, just as Burke dreaded of the age of the “liberal” middle-class, who produced psychologist doctors of people’s thoughts and behaviour.

[@jameseverett9037]

Yea such amazing people. I love it when these smart, famous and university educated guys who do all this time consuming research, finally figure out what us little nobodies have been saying all along. It took years of research for them to understand what was obvious to ordinary people who can draw obvious conclusions from common sense observation. I see this over & over & over now that we have internet: professors who become famous for flapping their jaws, then eventually come around to finally saying the obvious, as if no one knew.

[@upsidedown4734]

A Jonathan Haidt lecture was my "red pill" moment.

[@benhaidt5368]

Which lecture was it?

[@upsidedown4734]

Ben Haidt This one: kzbin.info/www/bejne/oXqUqISprLeJl7c I was an anti-theist who wanted to know why people hold religious beliefs so as better to talk them out of their beliefs out of my naive arrogance that religious beliefs are what is wrong with people. "Why can't people be so super smart like me and not beleive in gods?!" Just the very idea that people's conscious beliefs were strongly motivated by their moral beliefs and that these moral beliefs were shaped by our evolved psychological temperaments/moral intuitions blew apart some of my assumptions about how people arrive at their beliefs. Then, it was just a matter of turning this idea on my own beliefs. What moral intuitions/beliefs were influencing my own seemingly rational beliefs? I don't know how to describe it exactly but something about my assumptions were deeply flawed and I started to realize that I was looking through the wrong end of the telescope. It was almost like learning about Evolution for the first time. My presuppositions were seriously *wrong* and I had to rebuild from the ground up. (This^ isn't written well but I'm on a phone.)

[@TomFranklinX]

uPsIdEdOwN What presuppositions were you talking about? Hedonistic Nihilism is what killed the left. Is that what you meant? Hedonistic Nihilism is basically "I don't know the meaning of my existence, so I'm just gonna follow my biological programming and pretend they are meaningful so I don't fall into an existential crisis." That's a layman way of explaining the philosophical demon that forms the core belief of post-modernism While religion was still powerful, all reasons for morality finds its roots in the words of God, once that is gone, new reasons justifying morality must be invented. And that has not been well. We've came up with all sorts of shitty explanations that doesn't stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. For morality to have a justification, there must be something out there that does not operate by ANY laws of physics, something that's transcendent of this universe. This can be logically deduced, it doesn't require the slightest amount of belief, it doesn't even have anything to do with a religious God, but the post-modernists seem so abhorred by the slightest sign of superstition that they're determined to justify morality through mundane things. Sam Harris made a Ted talk trying to explain morality with science, where he basically assumed that our consciousness is beyond this universe without realizing he did. This is part of the post-modern movement trying to find the reason to making people feel better. And in the end all of them are only true if the human consciousness is not part of this universe. If the human consciousness is just the product of the laws of physics, a women experiencing rape is no more different than a rock rolling down hill.

[@upsidedown4734]

Awakened2Truth - Disciple of Jesus the Christ You're a very odd person. Good luck.

[@karsenhummel9341]

@@TomFranklinX I think you are forgetting our experience of morality is based on biological pathways to promote connections with other primates.

[@UnchainedEruption]

I wish I had professors like these two men.

[@anniebnannie9945]

De-fund nonsense courses. Bring back Classical Liberal Education.

[@iMedTube]

Allan 11235Q: What is GOPe? Can you please explain more for those who aren't from the states

[@pleasedontman]

"Leftism is the most dynamic religion of the last 100 years." -Dennis Prager

[@normalizedinsanity4873]

Dennis Prager IS A SOCIOPATH

[@OldGayGamer]

Prager is a dipshit. One moment he sounds like an intelligent, rational person. But if you keep listening, he'll start saying some totally crazy whacky shit.

[@AndrooUK]

Excellent excerpt.

[@ivantucakov1598]

Thank you!

[@ivandate9972]

nobody should cut Haidt !!! .... not even Peterson

[@mditt7]

Jordan demonstrates in this clip that he is not just a fine orator, but a good listener too. He is with someone however, who seems well worth listening to. I'm grateful to have access to the wisdom of men like this.

[@lonelysoul8834]

l love Jonathan Haidt

[@alex29443]

that point about the military was spot on.

[@123lowp]

Haidt's book is great. Highly recommend!

[@carlotapuig]

If only this video could get viral...

[@ma32851]

Wishing I could like this video more than once

[@Torgo1969]

Haidt and Peterson, together at last!

[@frankdelldeanofsatireandmi5791]

I've always wanted to hear these two together. I think I need to shower now

[@mybunnyhole8629]

can i join you :D

[@BarbarellaAlpha]

great video

[@Samsgarden]

Ha! Haidt pointing out the benefits of exclusion and prejudice!

[@onlysnowflakeshatepineappl7124]

Enjoyed this. I love your channel. We need more of these guys in universities and schools in general, none of those cancerous marxists ideologues

[@mindful3334]

I agree, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt are brilliant. I'm currently reading Coddling of the American Mind. But the topic of this discussion has nothing to do with Marxism. Or were you just expressing your opinion on an unrelated topic? Can I make a suggestion and recommend reading/listening to the economist Richard Wolff? Not as a whole, but there are tenets of Marxism which are beneficial.

[@ExistentialWill]

Weird how hatred of ideologues only demonstrates your own ideological blinders to Peterson and Haidt as ideologues….

[@notloki3377]

@@ExistentialWill if by ideologue you mean they have a point of view, then yeah. peterson and heidt's point of view are simply better. and getting their opponents out of academia is a cause worth fighting for.

[@notloki3377]

@@mindful3334 it has a lot to do with marxism, because marxism is left wing authoritarianism and what they are discussing is left wing authoritarianism in the universities. 1 in 5 social scientist calls themselves a marxist. we need a red purge of the academies.

[@villiestephanov984]

Fascinating with his simplicity of rational reasoning at other's waste and times...

[@MarkJohnson-dr4ws]

The point about a sophisticated religious structure being thrown out and being replaced by an unsophisticated religious structure is riveting. If, at a primordial level, we are religiously oriented, then the collapse of those elaborate religious structures which enable refined expression of our nature only leaves us with a lumpen expression of such a potent force. The result being the rabid idiocies of all types of fundamentalism and resultant tribalism, whether systematic like islam, or emotive like cultural marxism.

[@rubenximenes]

2020 says 'Hi there...'

[@SirKenchalot]

2 of my favorite people in the world. Religion is not the problem... sense at last, thank you!

[@nicholasmitchell8749]

The point of this interview is not to add to the cultural war, but to reach a new consencus.

[@HagiaSophia1952]

This is a fabulous post! Although I do not accept that we are 'hard-wired' for religious, but not scientific, thinking. You correctly identify FUNDAMENTALISM as the problem; but this is a mode of thinking: and is not confined to religion (even if the etymology of the word stems from the religious area). The 'fundamentalist' personality should be correlated with the 'authoritarian' personality!

[@scottmerritt9877]

It’s hilarious that he asserts we are hardwired for religion without supplying proof. Not much for rigor.

[@HagiaSophia1952]

@@scottmerritt9877 I imagine Professor Haidt is relying on the propensity to 'religion' around the globe: which is not the same thing as 'proving' religious precepts: so to that extent his may be correct.

[@lightbeforethetunnel]

The part where he said he wouldn't admit Christian Creationists to a geology program was extremely revealing. It's shocking to me such otherwise bright men don't see the inherent dogmatism present within excluding specific demographics like that. That, itself, is dogmatism. How do they know the Fundamentalists are not correct? Would it not be more appropriate to not pre-emptively exclude specific views from even having a chance of having a voice within mainstream academia? This is common sense... one of the limitations of the scientific method is pre-existing bias exactly like they're doing by excluding specific viewpoints like that. It's a systematic error in the scientific method unless they can *actually verify* that viewpoint is wrong (which they have not done, yet exclude people just for holding that view privately).

[@newgame7127]

Romans chapter 1 explains all of this very clearly

[@longlostwraith5106]

With enough imagination, the bible can explain anything you can imagine! Even if it doesn't...

[@newgame7127]

LongLostWraith I guess that is supposed to sound like a reasoned and intelligent criticism. It doesn't. It just sounds like you didn't bother to check my reference and replied from a position of ignorance.

[@longlostwraith5106]

This is were you're wrong though, not that you care... After all, when I'm starting to make sense it must mean that the devil is speaking through me, right?

[@newgame7127]

LongLostWraith Your presupposition is incorrect. As I said in my last statement: you're speaking from a place of ignorance. I don't remember saying that the devil is speaking through you. I'm not even sure if that would be sound Christian doctrine. Why don't you read Romans chapter 1 and find out what I'm referring to before arguing with me about something you clearly have no knowledge of.

[@jn3750]

Did you know that Johnathan was interviewed by Jordan when Johnathan was applying for a job at Harvard? Nice get-together.

[@inthedetails9749]

subbed

[@jsgehrke]

It’s OK, even necessary, to “have a religion.” It’s actually BELIEVING the tenets of that religion that creates a problem.

[@ihsahnakerfeldt9280]

Joel Gehrke lmao what the hell then does than it even mean to _have a religion_ if you didn't believe in its tenets?

[@jsgehrke]

Exactly.

[@seaotter52]

Joel Gehrke 👍

[@RKS4581]

Thanks for the upload. I would rather have a middle of the road understanding of things and move forward than have the extreme quick "fixes" and bring total upheaval. We need more of this kind of dialogue. If only the people that run everything would stop trying to brainwash people to their way of thinking. Lay out the facts. My critical butt can make up my own mind.

[@AM-os4ty]

Kelby Smith - You know what happens in the middle of the road? You get run over. Moderate drug use is not really a good idea. Moderation is a fine tool, but it cannot be an organization principle.

[@sanakimchi88]

Moderate drug use is an excellent idea. In fact it’s the only good usage of drugs. Too far and you’re an addict

[@ExistentialWill]

Your “middle of the road understanding” is the worst kind of brainwashing that doesn’t actually foster the “moving forward” that you want. Kierkegaard’s Two Ages clearly details the bs and absurdity of compromisers, “objective” people, and middle-way types who invent in their heads the idea that all sides can be weighed equally. Existence and decision is a matter of choice and commitment, not this psychologist’s reflection and surveys.

[@paulvmarks]

The word "Fundamentalist" comes from the early 1900s essays on the "Fundamentalists" of Christianity - the essays had nothing to do with biological evolution or geology (indeed some of the writers were well known scientists), the meaning of the word "fundamentalist" has somehow been totally changed.

[@rychei5393]

You can do that when you make an argument. Change the meaning of the word, shift the goal post.. sounds fair minded. /s

[@paulvmarks]

@@rychei5393 What happened was that the meaning of the word got changed - by people who wanted to make it a smear term. Although there are some fools who DESERVE the smear.

[@bluest1524]

3:20 Wrong. On the contrary, that would be all the more reason to encourage them to join a master's program at university. If they persist with a level of fundamentalism that precludes learning, thinking, new information, then they fail. But there's a good chance, if they're applying, that you may reach them with a more intelligent cosmology. Thus, you should absolutely admit them if they qualify academically. The admissions process should not be a means of social revenge for this man, or any other.

[@MatthewSchellenberg]

Dream Logic I agree. If they meet academic qualifications, can do research and are intelligent and hard working, they will benefit your department. If they have a radically different viewpoint, perhaps that will make the rest of the department better by keeping them on their heels about the quality of their evidence. A young earth creationist might be better at identifying blind spots in research. It doesn't follow that someone is a detriment to your department just because they violate your orthodoxy. Now if they're a jerk about it, that might be different.

[@manbearpig7521]

Yes I had a problem with this statement. We should be encouraging people to expose themselves to different ways of thinking. It was an odd train of thought from him.

[@StevenLascombe]

I'm young earth creationist, but I agree with you, I think anybody should be encouraged to join in a program whatever there worldview is. and as foolish as people could think my presuppositions are before getting into the program, I should be allowed to get in if I qualify academically. Otherwise we're just filling universities with clones. that is the danger.

[@ktex4873]

Exactly. Isn't it closed minded to exclude those types and not offer them a chance to hear the other side and learn from it.

[@RojaJaneman]

That’s what they’re saying. If a person is closed to the idea of changing their minds and thinking scientifically, then it’s a waste.

[@dgil3704]

Haidt deserves to be recognised up there with Peterson, Shapiro etc.

[@rychei5393]

Would ruin his career.

[@esterania1294]

You should meet Juan Soto Ivars and get his book “la casa del ahorcado” (when translated to english) it talks about the same but instead of religions speaks about “tabú” flourishing when society loses a link…

[@konstantinosstavropoulos3605]

good

[@mymoonflowerchild]

September 7, 2020: ... smh... sigh. They knew...

[@dragonwatter]

yeha makes perfect sense.

[@zsareinapouliot9125]

I don’t agree with the idea that university’s should exclude young earth Christians. That sound wrong to me.

[@rudigereichler4112]

Multiple factors is the case almost every time. Including in Climate Science. Often many of those factors are not even known or measurable which causes know factors to be overweighed.

[@rogeralsop3479]

I think this is true.

[@Formed123]

there are a couple of dichotomies to consider: - pagan fertility polytheism vs hebraic monotheism - faith-god-driven vs institutional-man-driven looking thru these paradigms there is still very much a case for someone who sees the hebraic scriptures as literal/fundamental, and lining this up with total logical positivism and rationality and science. Why else would we see such a huge and increasing alignment between the worldviews of religion-free, scripture-focused evangelicals and some ardent atheists and classical liberals? "I am the way the truth and the light" vs the church or church leaders are the way, the truth and the light. The complete flip within the past 10 years - that the most dogmatic absolutist fascist moralists are now not amongst the religious right but on the marxist left - is very true and remarkable.

[@rychei5393]

Statistics, or you got nothing but conjecture an opinion to coat your ego.

[@noyb154]

Is the non-aggression principle "fundamentalist", and therefore invalid?

[@erwinnijs1]

3:40 "How do you set up a mechanism to insure that you are not swamped by fundamentalist of any sort, ..., without the structure itself becoming totalitarian" EASY, we already figured that one out, a long time ago: Freedom of Religion! Now we only have to implement it to our political belief system.

[@123lowp]

Good point. An interesting thing is that the USSR tried to get rid of religion and it kept popping up even when they trained their people to not be religious. A certain percentage of humans seem to find religion by nature.

[@erwinnijs1]

Exactly, same as with left/right, collectivist/individualist, progressive/conservative, r/K, conformist/non-conformist, ... You can try to get rid of the other group/ideology/religion/predisposition, but it will always pop back up. You can try to force them to conform to the majority or to your group, but this will always lead to resentment, strife and eventually violence and war. Or... We could try a known and well tested solution: the free market principle and let all ideologies exist peacefully side by side.

[@nocommentnoname1111]

The new religion - exactly!

[@wonvon8625]

Interview someone who isn’t from a big city we have different views as to alot of things

[@domesday1535]

Support for the universities should never become a partisan issue. If it is, something is very wrong

[@rychei5393]

Started when Universities refused to teach ID and Creationism as science... cause it is not. The Right began to squelch about cancel culture and not being 'represented'. It hurts when science matter of factly crushes your Adam and Eve literalist world view.

[@virgilcaine3291]

He cannot see the forest for the trees. He strains the gnats yet swallows the camel. He treats the symptoms but misdiagnoses the illness. He's definitely not part of the solution when he wants to put the deck chairs on the stern of the Titanic because she is taking on water at the bow.

[@proudatheist2042]

What? Do you mean Dr. Haidt or Dr. Peterson? How are they "not part of the solution?"

[@TesserId]

I used to think that the greatest possible liberation of the mind in Zen and Daoism would clear the growing miasma. Now I have to say that was clearly too much thinking.

[@go2therock]

1.5 years later... only gotten worse.

[@fryingwiththeantidote2486]

*yeathatsright*

[@jeffcandy2479]

I like JP, but Haidt is a more careful thinker. Very clear and precise. JP has what appear to me to be "Deepak Chopra" tendencies.

[@forreich9380]

It's amazing how people will make excuses for their own slavery; for tyranny.

[@PeterLaman]

I really don't see why a fundamentalist creationist should not be allowed to a geology faculty. I do agree any branch of science should use the scientific method to get to conclusions. If they don't, they will be easily debunked by their fellow scientist. Censoring opinions, or beliefs when deciding whether or not to admit a student, will only create the impression that the current scientific theories can't be defended against different views.

[@d.m.collins1501]

"How can you make sure to exclude those who reduce everything to a fundamental cause?" says Jordan Peterson, right after he explains liberalism as the "unsophisticated religious structure" that you'll get when you throw out a "sophisticated religious structure." Not only does he reduce liberalism to a fundamental cause, he reduces it to THE PROBLEM OF ABANDONING RELIGION... and you can guess which religion he thinks they SHOULD adopt. Why do any skeptics or atheists believe anything this guy says?

[@rychei5393]

Yep

[@proudatheist2042]

I am an Atheist. I am still an Atheist after listening to him for several years now. I got to meet him in person a month and a half ago. He answered my question as his last question during the VIP Q & A. I didn't get offended by some of his past musings about Atheists, or his lackluster talk with Matt Dillahunty. I have learned an incredible amount from him on non theological topics, so I am grateful for that.

[@wendyharper8245]

I recently spoke with my scientist brother, with a P.D who has worked for decades in plant breeding, and now instructs at a college. Despite being a Christian, he is a scientist and does believe in climate change. We both have noted that the science and business departments and any other departments at colleges where students are preparing for actual careers, are not really involved in all these protests and demands, etc. It is the humanities and social sciences departments where these students go over-board. I was a Lit major and have a "mere" Masters, but I am disappointed at some of the developments in higher education. What types of careers will students get with majors in social justice, gender studies, etc. ? But I do agree about the religion aspect. Social justice has become like a god. Is this god going to get them a job? Maybe a minimum wage of fifteen dollars an hour is a living wage they will be happy to retire with.

[@rychei5393]

When God becomes and over arching idea for morality that others disagree with, the will raise their own counter banner of moral standards. Contrary to many a religious mind, their religions and their gods do not own the concept and guideposts of what is moral. So yes, you are right SJW are raising moral objections to society and want change in kind. Call that god if you like, perhaps it is time to have more that one god pretending to establish moral guidelines in this country.

[@proudatheist2042]

Those students will take any job that they can get with those degrees while wishing they went to school for a trade or earned a degree that would qualify them for a specific job.

[@socaltop10]

True, but universities are doomed for another reason: the internet allows mass education of ppl around the world. But universities don't cooperate in mass education because they want to make more money. The education fees are far greater than the cost of transferring the knowledge. Also, so many graduates are unable to get jobs because the quality of education was shlt.

[@traceylok675]

So bad to exclude Young Earthers. Go see creation.com and you will find many scientists who are in the science paradigm as much as evolutionists may be. Also what is the point of debate when you exclude people with differing views?

[@mistycloud4455]

A.G.I Will be man's last invention

[@pannobhasa]

Western civilization is in a similar state to Rome in the 4th century. Except instead of Christianity being the new progressive movement we've got a system that's just as hysterical, just as anti-civilization (in the sense of anti-Rome or anti-European culture), but without any real moral high ground. At least ancient Christianity had that.

[@andrewz4537]

OK, I need to look at my tendencies. Still regarding climate change science, which is my #1 issue (because it seems to be an issue of planetary or at least species survival) I ask 1 question.... who is denying what 98% of climate scientists are finding through meticulous and peer-reviewed research?

[@travisdonaldstanley6420]

It's not a binary choice. Except or deny. The scientific process demands that research continues. Look at the polar vortex, which really got going around 2007+. No one saw that coming. The left must keep preaching that damnation is going to happen unless we get a brand new green deal to safe us from ourselves. That's a red flag right there. The more the government and news media tells me what I MUST do, the more cautious I am. For 15 years the anointed have been telling us the sky is falling. After a while you get tone death to it and leave the church. Granted, it would be nice to not subsidize oil, timber, monocrops, cattle and let the free market take over so the wind and solar can really get going. Competition brings down prices. Also when the goverment stops subsizing, you must innovate or risk losing profits.

[@IamMrRand00m953]

Don't let someone into education because of their beliefs? Do these people not believe in free speech?

[@teresaamanfu7408]

Have you tried having a conversation with a creationists? It’s like banging your head against the wall.

[@GreyWolfLeaderTW]

I would question Haidt's claim regarding putting scientific thinking in opposition of religious thinking, since scientific thinking is *a particular kind of religious thinking*. Principally, as Nietzsche pointed out, it is the product of Christian thought and belief that there is an objective real world outside of the subjective views of human beings, that things we see in the natural world are real and not an illusion (as many Eastern religions claim), and that the study of nature is a worthwhile endeavor to better understand the Universe and the God who created it. Before Christianity, the Greeks thought nature and natural forces were the product of chaotic, emotional, and unpredictable will of gods. This was the most common view that animist and pantheist religions around the world had at the time. Islam believes that the world only exists in the mind of Allah. All the Eastern religions believe that the true reality is within one's own person, not the external world. As Galileo said, "Mathematics is the alphabet in which God wrote the universe."

[@123lowp]

GreyWolfLeaderTW ... scientific thinking is not religious thinking. Why do people that are religious keep thinking that science is like their religion? Science is just experiment and then test variables and then repeat and get down to what's really going on in reality. That has nothing to do with gods and culture history and God's chosen people and God telling people things Etc.

[@rychei5393]

@@123lowp Pretty sure they keep thinking science is religious because it directly challenges tightly held religious beliefs they have. If their perceived enemy is equal to them, that is much more tolerable that if the 'enemy' is superior and indifferent. The are creating a false dichotomy to escape a would be traumatic way of thinking for them... That is my guess.

[@deedlessdeity218]

Toldya.

[@Paul-sj5db]

If a young Earth creationist did apply to take a geology course why would you reject them? If they're disruptive and unwilling to listen then by all means kick them out but if the facts are so concrete then they will either change their mind or leave the course. Maybe in the process of changing their mind they'll ask questions that have never been asked before. The problem with say the sociology program is not the students and their initial position. You should expect them to be stupid, naive and biased. If they leave the course as stupid, naive and biased as they entered it then the problem is the teachers and the curriculum for not highlighting the students stupidity, naivety and bias.

[@Samsgarden]

New?

[@carlabroderick5508]

Concerned that Haidt is so sure fundamentalist thinking isn’t improved by higher education. I think it should be.

[@pedrohack2869]

Carla Broderick Higher education is the cause of the fundamentalist thinking. These days students are only exposed to one point of view and take it as fact.

[@kerrzUSR]

It is! But the problem is that higher education in certain areas is becoming fundamentalist, education is becoming corrupt and thats absolutely disastrous

[@Seeattle]

What did the military say / do that was overtly right wing? I’ve never heard about it.

[@scottsbowers]

I think Haidt was just giving a hypothetical reverse analogy. Universities vs Military.

[@thejackanapes5866]

Jesus Fucking Christ. Here's another video with a thumbnail of Haidt depicting him as if he's having a nervous, histrionic psychological catastrophe; but he's perfectly calm in the video. Why are there so many misleading thumbnails on youtube?

[@iain5615]

I've always believed hard left wing people, which now includes 'liberals', were always 'religious' in their outlook. Communism has been more of a theology than a political ideology. Politics should include analysis and thought about how to improve situations, communists have never done this and instead think about the feel good factor of bringing equality to all and ignoring all the historical failures by simply stating that they were never implemented properly and next time it will work or that it needs a modern nation for it to work. Pure wishful thinking that one associates with religious fundamentals who do not base their beliefs on rational thought using archaeological, historical, philosophical, etc. evidence

[@miketomlin6040]

USA Liberals, Democrat Party, are classified as Centre Right. Very low tax rates for high earners, pro Capitalism. Almost no one on the Left in the USA votes Democrat. They vote Green!!

[@iain5615]

@@miketomlin6040 they are not economic left wingers believing in socialist ifeals. Instead they are cultural marxists supporting identity politics. They are still left wing but believe in the oppression of identities and the evil oppressor instead of the oppression of the proletariat.

[@miketomlin6040]

@@iain5615 Cultural Marxism is an anti semitic trope, or gibberish. The only Marxists one might find in the USA circa 2021 are a few octogenerian members of the Communist party or Authentic Christians. Jesus being a Left Libertarian Socialist, like Marx, ironically. I'm oppressed daily by half wits unaware how Right Wing USA Democrats are!

[@iain5615]

@@miketomlin6040 cultural marxists abound, traditional communists are far fewer.. Jesus was not a communist, he believed more in equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome. Not everyone will go to heaven, but those who come to God with love no matter how late they finally repent they are welcome to heaven.

[@davidgifford8112]

A little uncomfortable about the concept of baring students on the grounds of being "fundamentalist" anything. A Christian fundamentalist wanting to attend a geology course, I posit, would be interested in understanding of the scientific explanation of earths creation and a college professor should not try to "safe space" the potential student. If students sign up to courses that they qualify to attend with the intent to disrupt the education of others on ideological grounds is another matter.

[@BaronVonBlair]

[Golf clapping]

[@ihsahnakerfeldt9280]

BaronVonBlair You're fucking a white male! Seriously man you're so gloriously Scandinavian looking you'd rustle a lot of SJW jimmies just by being

[@dontsaygabe]

Audio is unlistenable

[@williammorgan9047]

Yes I have read articles where they call themselves a new religion, “Progressive Fundementalism”. In those same articles they speak of “witnessing” and “converting”. Also that Hollywood is doing everything that it can right now to spread “PF”, and that it is just a matter of time... (in their mind). I found this article (basically a letter of encouragement to the believers) that I speak of as pretty scary. Although the just handing us a name like “Progessive Fundamentalism” (which seems like it would poll very negatively) was a good thing. Search up progressive fundementalism you will find these articles. Ok here is the link: www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/2016/11/14/13526406/progressive-fundamentalism-make-america-great-again

[@travisdonaldstanley6420]

If you become woke to the true reality of the USA, then you are born again. If you don't become woke you are cast into hell. A ultraconservative, a racist. They've become what they were always against because of junk leadership. The adults didn't tell the kids to sit down and shut up.

[@brucec43]

I'm no young earther, but I find it interesting they're willing to deny access to geology program because the student doesn't buy the established science on the earth's age. Hypothetical. What if this was 1066 and the student was telling people there was a continent accross the Atlantic ocean? Admit the student and teach him the truth. Don't deny him that.

[@willnill7946]

I think your missing his point that followed that comment

[@zuperlink2020]

I note that J.H. said a "graduate program", not an undergrad program. I agree, one would hope that an undergrad program would take all faiths. But I think grad level students who are aiming to do research, be it social sciences or any science, need to demonstrate a greater capacity to use the scientific method, along with the other analytical tools we have. That's why, yes, baldy, we should screen out folks who are not in the "scientific paradigm" at a grad level. Also, J.H. saying that the lack use of the tools of science (overly personal, non-logical, consistent methods, and too much post-modern analysis etc.) is at the heart of why the social sciences are in such deep trouble, and why some of the research coming from these fields is so addled, and/or useless. The use of half-formed, idiosyncratic examination methods in these fields MUST be curtailed. Defunding them is the right approach if they don't respond to/refuse be open to critique.

[@j_5244]

Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. -2 Corinthians 5:16 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. -Acts 16:30-31 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” -John 3:16 And he (Jesus) said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

[@123lowp]

J Whitton .... brainwashed and delusional. Does it feel good?

[@cobramcjingleballs]

Woah....I am fundamentalist christian...also gay and love science...I dont believe in 170 yr old paradigms of evolution or geology (mt st helens effectively disproved uniformitarism) and evolution theory should have been thrown out with discovery of genetics. The idea that you should not allowed in a program with contrasting points of view is EXACTLY what Kuhn says holds science back, that noncontrary views can only be expressed after old professors die out. 20 yrs for einstein to be accepted and the guy who invented continental drift DIED before his ideas were accepted, ridiculed both before then by you disagree, not gonna let you into our clique and scoff at ideas.

[@kandysman86]

Lol, what u know to be the case? Science isn't suppose to "know" any theory that is untestable by its nature is the correct way of thinking. That was silly.

[@davidgifford8112]

kandysman86 Wrong, any theory of value is testable (relativity, evolution) an untestable theory is little more than a thought experiment

[@kandysman86]

David Gifford most tenants of evolution and relativity are untestable tripe. darwinian Evolution has been disproved time and time again. It's just ignored because it doesn't fit the godless narrative

[@truegrit7697]

The far right and the far left are problematic. Religious zeal, no matter what side, is always problematic.

[@mbm8404]

I have 5 university degrees and over 25 years of military service and generally consider myself a center right type of person. I agree with Haidt that universities are and should be losing support. I’m MUCH less supportive of them now because of their ideological biases and illiberal behavior.

[@benfrank8649]

It seems like Peterson has more of a following than Haidt, however Haidt, seems to have contributed more new ideas to psychology. I love him

[@mrenovatio3739]

it's not the students coming into the programme who are fundamentalists, it's the university programming that is breading fundamentalism...

[@rstevewarmorycom]

Yes, caring for others, instead of stomping their face on the ladder as you climb over them, is against the newest modern improvement on morality!! Yes! I note you find that troubling for you, as do many criminals!!

[@AnonymousOmniscience]

Nothing more tribal than xenophobia.

[@kitananikolai6708]

"Diversity is our strength" 🤣

[@blorph1]

😂

[@lakshmisharma2243]

Yes becouse otherwise there will be no concept of right and wrong we need diversity

[@lakshmisharma2243]

If all agree on same opinion jow will growths opinion

[@DR_Neal_Rigger]

Where are the atheists on this one?

[@lonelysoul8834]

worshiping the government

[@mydh122]

Jonathon Haidt is a Jewish atheist prof who teaches at NYU.

[@gregwarner3753]

Obviously an immigrant from Babbleon.

[@paulvmarks]

Today "fundamentalist" means unthinking dogmatist - but hat was not its original meaning. Its original meaning was someone who held to the basic doctrines of Christianity (the existence of God, the divinity of Jesus, the human soul surviving the death of the body......), against the "Social Gospel" which essentially redefined Christianity (and all religion) as about increasing the size and power of the government to "help the poor". The people who wrote the early 1900s essays on the "fundamentals" of Christianity were NOT anti evolution, and they did NOT believe that world was created in 4004 B.C.

[@seaotter52]

Paul Marks Bishop Usher proved, using the Bible, that the Earth is quite young. Pretty much everyone in the early 19th century believed that the Earth was only 6000 years old. Lord Kelvin using large body cooling put the Earth's age in the millions of years (radioactive heat was unknown at the time). This was quite a blow to the common religious understanding of the era. More understanding of the world has brought that number to the billions of years. Christianity was also quite keen on the geo centrist view of the solar system to the point that Christianity put heliocentric proponents to death. Christianity like all religions is a human invention. Usually man made which is why women are second rate characters in the so called holy books. Religion evolves and changes and eventually Christianity and Islam will be replaced by something else just like we don't believe in the Norse, Roman, Greek, Babylonian, Sumerian, Mayan religions, our current ones will also be irrelevant.

[@paulvmarks]

What you are saying has nothing whatever to do with the early 1900s essays on the "fundamentals" of Christianity (from which the word "fundamentalist" comes). Your "reply" has nothing to do with my comment. If you really want to reply a quick glace at the essays and a check on who wrote them would be in order. The target was NOT science - the target was the collectivism of the "Social Gospel".

[@AnthropoidOne]

so sick of humanity...

[@AnkhDjedSeneb]

Making you demoralized is the goal of the Left, so you won't resist their seizure of power and your enslavement to their system. Stand up and fight for your Liberty and the Freedom of others !

[@vanscoyoc]

Trying to improve his game...to do what...gulags in the West?

[@nicholasnissen1547]

Lmfao wait till more robots take low wage jobs. This should make for a more even more glorious shit show as world crumbles.

[@bluewater454]

54 orthodox leftists listened to this, thought "alt right", and hit the dislike button.

[@MrChaosi]

so basicly like what the right is doing_ just replace immigration with abortien

[@mikesfree3988]

So right wing conservative fascists are not fundamentalists in any way. OK great analysis here. Where did this guy get his degree, Trump University?.

[@travisdonaldstanley6420]

Like he said in the beginning. He is seeing a sudden change from the left. They have basically becomed what they always complained about with the right. The moderates who once voted left are disgusting by them. But, you are right. The right wing guys are just as bad. It would have been nice if they touched on that.

[@jesuschristneverlived6938]

FIRST IN BITCHES

[@rogeralsop3479]

Correct - liberalism is a religion.