Miller-McCune Magazine has an interesting story of the different moral codes used by liberals and conservatives. An abbreviated version is on the web here, but you'll have to read the paper copy to get the long form. A psychologist/ethics professor at the University of Virginia, Jonathan Haight, is himself a liberal atheist, but his latest research is on how liberals and conservatives view and use morality.
It's insightful and a good reminder to stop and consider issues from the other point of view. You don't have to change your mind, just see where they are coming from. It was telling that conservatives often understand liberals better than the other way around.
I'm for anything that helps us all realize that those who disagree with us are not necessarily monsters. My question is, that if half of the country disagrees with the other half on such basic fundamentals, how do we ever move forward?
People often ask me, how did I become such a liberal when I started out as a Reaganite, and I usually say becoming a mother had a lot to do with it. This article helped put things in another perspective for me, that the values of harm and justice did not work with the old labels any longer. Most of the people I admired were liberals and that helped to shape my moral framework. Much thanks to my folks for letting me watch all that Star Trek as a kid.
My question is, that if half of the country disagrees with the other half on such basic fundamentals, how do we ever move forward?We vote in elections.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, a good progressive will understand that it is the clash ideas (or classes if you wish, or interests, or whatever faction you chose to see) and the subsequent synthesis (peacefully in an election or violently in a revolation) that yields forward movement.
Conflict, resolution, and subsequent conflict yields progress.