The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt | Book Review

[@mikegseclecticreads]

Nice review! And great points. Personally I liked Haidt's and others' idea that our intuition governs our moral reasoning in ways that aren't always easily explained (although I do agree with you on the exceptions you pointed out here). I also especially appreciated the idea that people can be driven by different core values and that disagreements about moral issues can arise not just because one side doesn't care about morality, but because they're forming their morality off of different principles. I guess it's a bit obvious in some sense, but keeping that in mind really helps me to assume good intentions when talking with someone who disagrees with me.

[@DavoodGozli]

Thanks for watching, Mike. I think discussing these books is somewhat similar to walking on a tightrope. We ought to be careful not to fall (in either of the two possible sides). In my experience, when I take the time to understand an author it is then almost impossible to fully disagree with the author. Have a good week!

[@O.G.Rose.Michelle.and.Daniel]

Great review, and my brother actually had a class with Haidt. He was a kind and good professor, I am told. I enjoyed The Righteous Mind, though agree with your criticisms. As always, you were balanced and articulate.

[@kenward1310]

Thank you. I enjoyed this.

[@DavoodGozli]

You’re very welcome.

[@Trapping_ackbar7]

Just discovered this channel, good review! It’s funny too because I came to a similar post hoc reasoning as you did for Haidts moral scenarios: it’s a behavior that we condemn generally because it might lead to other scenarios in the future where the caveats are no longer accounted for. However, another caveat (yes another!) could be that Haidts scenarios took place on a spaceship let’s say, and it is crashing towards earth. The ship will burn upon reentry, there’s no way of saving those on board, so everyone will die. No one on earth will know of those final moments. Are the actions of the siblings still morally neutral? After all, no one on earth will repeat it, and there’s no way for the siblings to potentially repeat it themselves. I still think the action itself is wrong. But that was sorta my thoughts when I was reading his book. Cheers though, earned a new subscriber.

[@DavoodGozli]

Thanks a lot! I like your spaceship thought experiment as an extension to Haidt’s scenarios. I also don’t think we can cease our longing toward the ethical, the universal, or the eternal, despite our very limited existence.

[@fotinipapachatzaki9628]

Thank you very insightful

[@DavoodGozli]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@jonlittle5032]

In attempting to validate the ability to reason and justify moral intuition in the examples presented by Haidt, this content provider misses the crucial point. It is not that they cannot be rationalized; it is that there is validity in moral intuition without moral reasoning.

[@DavoodGozli]

I don’t disagree with you.