tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post7550252690997178401..comments2024-03-28T17:58:56.707+11:00Comments on The Social Pathologist: Stenosophic Liberalism.The Social Pathologisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-16148319345314167192012-01-14T16:26:42.669+11:002012-01-14T16:26:42.669+11:00Started your blog. Wanted to say hello. I'm ...Started your blog. Wanted to say hello. I'm a retired, stroke survirviving, psychologist with aphasia. <br /><br />I'm at http://taxi-dog.com.<br /><br />Please keep in touch.<br /><br />TDThe Taxi Doghttp://taxi-dog.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-73271405733156816442011-10-13T13:06:54.705+11:002011-10-13T13:06:54.705+11:00It seems like loyalty, respect, and purity, while ...It seems like loyalty, respect, and purity, while they may involve morality themselves, are mostly important as ways of regulating care and fairness. They help ensure that care doesn't go to people who violate the social contract or who aren't part of the social contract in the first place (i.e., outgroup members).jmperrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-8588123517164052162011-10-12T09:14:44.577+11:002011-10-12T09:14:44.577+11:00@David.
I think that there are certain geneticall...@David.<br /><br />I think that there are certain genetically determined personality types. The strident dogmatic feminists of today are of the same type as female prohibitionists in the past. Same hardware, different software.<br /><br />Every time I see Richard Dawkins, I can't but help form the association with between him and a fundamentalist preacher: except that his fundamentalism is Darwinism.<br /><br />I imagine that most of today's food puritans, if born a century ago, would have ended up being sexual puritans instead. Once again, same hardware, different software.The Social Pathologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-67696960845500935792011-10-12T09:06:32.942+11:002011-10-12T09:06:32.942+11:00@KJJ
This resembles the account of the rise of ph...@KJJ<br /><br /><i>This resembles the account of the rise of philosophical Liberalism: when Christendom broke apart, political theory trended towards the "least common denominator" of shared morality. See Hobbes' denial of the highest good or Locke's attempt to reduce political morality to property crimes.</i><br /><br />I'm mulling over this point. I think the explanation is more complex.<br />Firstly, most of the centers near the water are advanced commercial centers. In order to be commercially successful these areas would employ large numbers of people who have specialised intellectual skills.<br /><br />Now, specialisation in thinking is akin to the division of labour. Efficiencies are gained by concentrating on a specific task, and as such, cognitive demands are <i>lessened</i>. Specialisation therefore, tends to breed irrationality in areas outside the specialists field. The wealth of the city, on the other hand, provides a cushion which protects people from the consequences of their actions. (These are my preliminary thoughts on the subject)The Social Pathologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-75016263700454982612011-10-11T12:26:22.526+11:002011-10-11T12:26:22.526+11:00Haidt speculates elsewhere on the cause of "s...Haidt speculates <a href="http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/07/07/why-conservatives-and-liberals-talk-past-each-other-on-moral-issues/" rel="nofollow">elsewhere</a> on the cause of "stenosophy":<br /><br />"How did it come to pass that in much of Europe, and in some parts of the United States, moral concerns have been restricted to issues related to harm/welfare/care and justice/rights/fairness? We believe that a team of historians and sociologists could easily tell such a story, probably involving references to the growth of free markets, social mobility, science, material wealth, and ethnic and religious diversity. Mobility and diversity make a morality based on shared valuation of traditions and institutions quite difficult (Whose traditions? Which institutions?). These factors help explain the electoral map of the United States in the 2004 presidential election. When viewed at the county level, the great majority of counties that voted for John Kerry are near major waterways, where ports and cities are usually located and where mobility and diversity are greatest. Areas with less mobility and less diversity generally have the more traditional five-foundation morality, and therefore were more likely to vote for George W. Bush – and to tell pollsters that their reason was “moral values.”"<br /><br /><br />This resembles the account of the rise of philosophical Liberalism: when Christendom broke apart, political theory trended towards the "least common denominator" of shared morality. See Hobbes' denial of the highest good or Locke's attempt to reduce political morality to property crimes. (Pardon the caricature)KJJnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-42006698818336717862011-10-11T02:11:08.827+11:002011-10-11T02:11:08.827+11:00It would be interesting to see how these patterns ...It would be interesting to see how these patterns have changed over time. "Liberal" in 2011 means something quite different from liberal in 1900 or even liberal in 1965...for example, a 1965 liberal might well believe in American particularism and the importance of a strong national defense ("Loyalty to your group, family, nation"), whereas a 2011 liberal ("progressive") would be much less-likely to have this view.<br /><br />Also, it strikes me that the same meta-theme can be manifested very differently. "Purity," for example, could imply the importance of sexual virginity---to a modern-day "progressive," it is more likely concerned with the purity of food.David Fosterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15464681514800720063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-72493109251218270452011-10-10T21:04:27.344+11:002011-10-10T21:04:27.344+11:00@ Thursday, yep same source for the quote. I'm...@ Thursday, yep same source for the quote. I'm still trying to get the original paper but having difficulties.<br /><br />@Anon<br /><br />Something for you in the next post.The Social Pathologisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12927698533626086780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-59096689343006171942011-10-10T07:22:43.425+11:002011-10-10T07:22:43.425+11:00How about like in your previous post, individuals ...How about like in your previous post, individuals with IQ ranging from 120-130 thought in a multiparametric way than those that have over 130 IQs? <br /><br />Liberal Whites do have higher IQ than Conservative Whites. <br /><br />Average IQ from Wordsum conversions for whites:<br /><br />Lib Dems - 107.5<br />Con Dems - 94.9<br />Lib Reps - 96.0<br />Con Reps - 102.1<br /><br />Source: Audacious Epigone<br /><br />I suppose many highly intelligent liberals are like Mozart or people with Aspergers and extremely focused on a single discipline.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-25440239279702281762011-10-10T04:06:03.117+11:002011-10-10T04:06:03.117+11:00That actually may be the same study you cited.That actually may be the same study you cited.Thursdayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13002311410445623799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29137904.post-59768801119730801192011-10-10T04:05:38.007+11:002011-10-10T04:05:38.007+11:00Will Wilkinson also found a study where people ten...Will Wilkinson also found a study where people tended to score higher on the binding moral foundations when they were afraid or under some sort of threat:<br /><br />http://www.forbes.com/sites/willwilkinson/2011/03/28/the-moral-default-setting-liberal-or-conservative/<br /><br />Since we in the West live in a very comfortable and secure environment, we naturally tend to downplay the conservative moral foundations.Thursdayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13002311410445623799noreply@blogger.com