Bulldrek v3.0

Thanks to Pistons, I saw this article:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/200 ... it-matters

The thrust of it is an attempt to quantify some of the differences between conservatives and liberals (in the only country that matters, of course) on moral grounds. First, they slice morality up into a nice, arbitrary group of categories:

• Harm/care. It is wrong to hurt people; it is good to relieve suffering.

• Fairness/reciprocity. Justice and fairness are good; people have certain rights that need to be upheld in social interactions.

• In-group loyalty. People should be true to their group and be wary of threats from the outside. Allegiance, loyalty and patriotism are virtues; betrayal is bad.

• Authority/respect. People should respect social hierarchy; social order is necessary for human life.

• Purity/sanctity. The body and certain aspects of life are sacred. Cleanliness and health, as well as their derivatives of chastity and piety, are all good. Pollution, contamination and the associated character traits of lust and greed are all bad.

Everyone has some level of belief on these moral axes, says the theory, but the proportions in which you believe in them is what makes you conservative or liberal, as well as how staunchly you are of either. The specific split mentioned in the article says that conservatives more highly value the last three, while liberals value the first two more. I don't know if they are trying to say that conservatives are more moral with this unequal division, but ignoring that, this seems like an interesting take on American politics. At least it seems that way to me, fitting in with my own views and all.

What do you lot think? Are they right? Even if they are, does this help us in any way? I think it has potential, since one could use this framework to more accurately target argumentation when dealing with people on the other side. For example, when talking to an animal rights advocate about hunting, it helps to point out how hunting actually reduces animal suffering if you want to bring them around to your side.

Or like this guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRVdiHu1 ... annel_page

Speaking to someone's values when they don't value the same things you do is useful. agree/disagree?

WillyGilligan wrote:Everyone has some level of belief on these moral axes, says the theory, but the proportions in which you believe in them is what makes you conservative or liberal, as well as how staunchly you are of either.

Hmmm. I'm not so sure I agree with this, but I'll need some time to digest.