Pain eases guilt?

One group of researchers thinks it does. More here.

Another person's goodness

Psychologist Jonathan Haidt and his colleagues irritate me. Their reasoned, exhaustive work on morality makes it impossible for me to do what I want to do: Claim the high ground, declare that my idea of goodness is the only definition in existence, and paint anyone who disagrees with me as a self-centered, power-hungry jerk. But Haidt et al make a compelling case for the idea that other moralities exist.

If I’m going to truly understand goodness, I’m going to have to accept that fact (albeit with gritted teeth). When I’m not being annoyed by Haidt and friends, I’m thankful they have given me a way into other modes of thought. Hence, the purpose of this post is to dive into their work and through it to peer out of the eyes of folks who believe respecting authority, remaining pure and giving loyalty to one’s group are as important to goodness as compassion, caring and fairness.

Continue reading →

The problem with the Enlightenment

I’ve always been a big fan of the Enlightenment. When I came across a quote in a paper by Jonathan Haidt and Craig Joseph, however, I began to wonder if all that emphasis on reason and rational action had left us with a problem. In discussing the impact of that earth-shaking period in the 18th century, the two moral psychologists wrote:

Where the Greeks focused on character and asked what kind of person we should each become, modern ethics focuses on actions, trying to determine which ones we should do.*

Continue reading →

We may be hard wired to be moral

Yale Psychologist Paul Bloom believes human beings are hard-wired to be moral. During the discussion of his work at the Edge Foundation conference on the New Science of Morality, Bloom clarifies that he’s more hesitant about his conclusions than he might first appear, but his work still has interesting implications. If any of this is true, then what are the mechanisms that push us to work against our hard wiring? (And, does anyone doubt that humans are not always moral?) If we’re born with a sense of morality, how do we lose it? What is this hard wiring? Is our baby sense of right and wrong specific, or is this just a general sense that these two categories exist?

Bloom provides an intro to his work in his conference bio:

Continue reading →

Our morally stressed culture

Today I came across research that prompted me to consider a rather nasty question: Has our culture become so stressed and dysfunctional that we are swiftly becoming incapable of acting morally?

The first warning note was sounded by Notre Dame Psychologist Darcia Narvaez who posted a paper on The Decline of Children and the Moral Sense on her Psychology Today blog. Narvaez writes: Read More.

The curse of the liberal

It’s been weeks since the Edge Foundation held its amazing conference on The New Science of Morality, and I still haven’t been able to digest all that was discussed. I couldn’t attend this select meeting, but like many other people, I’ve been eagerly catching up at the conference’s website, which features transcripts and video of presentations and discussions. The conference focused on the latest thinking in moral psychology, and to a newcomer to the topic like myself, the material is overwhelming. It’s also fascinating.

The first talk was given by University of Virginia Social Psychology Professor Jonathan Haidt, who says:

Morality is a social construction, but it is constructed out of evolved raw materials provided by five (or more) innate “psychological” foundations. In surveys and experiments I have conducted in the USA, Europe, Brazil, and India, I have consistently found that highly educated liberals generally rely upon and endorse only the first two foundations (Harm and Fairness), whereas people who are more conservative, more religious, or of lower social class usually rely upon and endorse all five foundations.

Haidt’s five foundations, in this order, are: Harm, Fairness, Ingroup, Authority and Purity. Read More.