The moral roots of liberals and conseritives

Hive Psychology

Psychologist Jonathan Haidt speaks about the Human Animal. Jonathan Haidt studies the five moral values that form the basis of our political choices, whether we’re left, right, or center.

In this eye-opening talk, he pinpoints the moral values that liberals and conservatives tend to honor most.

Jonathan Haidt studies how — and why — we evolved to be moral. By understanding more about our moral roots, his hope is that we can learn to be civil and open-minded, or basically less moral, because it conflicts with being more liberal…hum?

Click HERE to view his TED video explanations (complete with PowerPoint)…

His premise is, that a “righteous” mind or a mind that is founded in moral authority, needs to adopt a blended variety of moral thinking, that can offer a wider spectrum and better balanced model’s perspective. It’s the religious laws and morality that have caused all the problems over the centuries, while building all those foundational pillars that hold up a the roof over a law abiding democratic society. He’s got it all figured out now…hum?

We just need to leave it to the psychoanalysis and Psychologist to write a new script for how that model needs to appear and then everyone can follow those recommendations…hum?


The theory posits that there are (at least) six innate moral foundations, upon which cultures develop their various moralities, just as there are five innate taste receptors on the tongue, which cultures have used to create many different cuisines.(So…morals in this theory, supposedly parallel taste, at least in a metaphorically accommodating and fashionable pretense that seems palatable for academic debates.

The six are;

  • Care/harm
  • Fairness/cheating
  • Liberty/oppression
  • Loyalty/betrayal
  • Authority/subversion
  • Sanctity/degradation

He claims that, Liberals (leftists) tend to endorse primarily the Care, Fairness, and Liberty foundations, whereas conservatives (rightists) tend to endorse all six foundations more equally.

Of course it’s only a theory, and it doesn’t seem to delve into the reasons why so many Liberals care to impose “Unfairness” and “Oppression” on religious practitioner’s “Liberties” for their “Loyalties” to a higher “Authority” and respect for the “Sanctity” in the meaning of marriage! WOW…all six exposed for the duplicity in such a theory, in just one sentence…hum?

It is strange to me, how often we hear the “weasel words” and metaphors i.e. Elephant and Rider, or selected publications that strike the same cords and play the same melody in attempting to authenticate an opinion as fact.

Haidt’s principle line of research since graduate school has been on the nature and mechanisms of moral judgment, that is judgement of those attempting to infer a moral authority.

In this moral psychology, social institutionalism proposes that moral judgments and actions are caused more by emotions than by reason…hum? Would this apply to immoral decisions as well?

In liberally supported, sponsored and controlled academia, who really cares that this approach contradicts earlier, rationalist theories of morality, such as of Lawrence Kohlberg’s stage theory of moral reasoning. After all Jonathan Haidt is the “new authority” and as such, places distractingly polarized emphasizes on the role of reasoning, in that of reaching moral conclusions.

Haidt asserts that moral judgment is primarily given rise to by intuition with reasoning playing a very marginalized role in most of our moral decision-making. Conscious thought-processes serves as a kind of post hoc justification of our decisions.

His main evidence comes from studies of “moral dumbfounding” where people have strong moral reactions but, fail to establish any kind of rational principle to explain their reaction, according to his hypothesis.

Objections to Haidt’s Model

You’ll probably never hear the objections, coming from Joseph Paxton and Joshua Greene in their review of the evidence, that suggests that moral reasoning plays a significant role in moral judgment, including counteracting automatic tendencies toward bias.


Well…two very good reasons are probably because that doesn’t propeller the very liberal media and equally apparent the extremely liberal indoctrination of academia’s objectives.

Greene and colleagues have proposed an alternative to the social intuitionist model suggesting that deontological moral judgments, which involve rights and duties, are driven primarily by intuition, while utilitarian judgments aimed at promoting the greater good are underlain by controlled cognitive reasoning processes.

It’s always fascinating to see how the shallow rooted knowledge that became acquired over as little as twenty five years of study, allows one to perpetuate some new founded belief, that they in their infinite wisdom have somehow unlocked the secrets to what makes us all tick…The part that’s more perplexing is that, so many just refuse to question why and how such a premise becomes promoted and who populates these ideas in the halls of our higher learning institution!

In the attempts to dismantle the Traditional Family Model (TFM) and replace it with the Strategic Family Model (SFM) they need to also think in decisive militaristic terms, and in positioning for an offensive posture, they need to out “flank” their opposition and divide their enemies forces. The ability to defend an attack on two fronts will most always weaken a responders ability to sustain an attack, let along repel one!…So…enemies, attacking, flanking, forces, etc…sounds like a war…hum?

Eight Moral Values to Teach Your Children

The war started a longtime ago…it started when the public school system began having more and more influence over our children’s minds, than that of the two parent (TFM) model. This was compounded when economic engineering dangled the lure of dual income earning under the noses of our society’s historically oppressed…women and minorities (front #1) and the social engineering followed suit (front #2) in the liberally dominated, socialistically styled, government run public school systems.

Now try to sustain influence over raising your children when they being educated by something else and see where these eight basic “child development” fundamentals come out of such an environment;

  • 1. Respect

  • One of the most important values to teach your children is respect.

  • 2. Obedience

  • Obedience is something that doesn’t come naturally, for any of us! It seems more “fun” to want to break the rules, doesn’t it?

  • 3. Politeness

  • Remembering to say “please” and “thank you” isn’t a difficult task, but if kids are never taught or reminded, they will never do it.

  • 4. Responsibility

  • Believe it or not, children can be taught responsibility from a young age! You don’t need to be overbearing about it, but giving your kids easy chores to do, builds stronger character!

  • 5. Humility

  • I know this one may sound a little strange, but humility is an important aspect of life that we often overlook.

  • 6. Good Manners

  • Good manners may not necessarily be a moral value per se, but you will find that for the most part, good manners are sorely lacking in the young people of today’s generation.

  • 7. Friendliness

  • You will find that friendliness comes naturally to most kids; it’s just their trusting nature!

  • 8. Honesty

  • We’ve all heard it said, “Honesty is the best policy.” It’s as true today as it ever was!

Now which of these eight are being taught in your public school in the same way that you would, during those six to eight hours a day that your child sits in a classroom environment? As their education continues, and as we continue to work more to fund these dens of inequity! Try to find a conservative teacher or professor among the top ten elitist’s “higher” learning institutions, or for that matter your local elementary school. These schools are only an Intelligence Quotient sieve, that processes, identifies, segregates, via SAT Scores and Entrance Exams and then decides who is most valuable!

Now I realize,…that some could see this as a very narrow minded view, especially because what could be derived from this is that, education is the problem, yet truly there is noting further form the truth!…It’s who is at the wheel of education, driving the school bus right over the cliff and more importantly, who handed them the keys…hum?


One thought on “The moral roots of liberals and conseritives”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Writing with the Veiled…