Living in a state of perpetual moral outrage

Maybe those on both sides of the issues discussed in this article could discuss it with out resorting to scripture or insults.

Please tell me what you think about any part of this article, but please think before you post. What does it bring to mind for you as a conservative or a liberal and why, this requires honesty on both sides and not just stubborn, I refuse to budge responses.

If your a refuse to budge type, stay out of this one, please!! Oh and please before you start you comment tell us what you are, conservative or liberal or whatever. That will help me to understand where you might be coming from better.

http://www.believermag.com/issues/200508/?read=interview_haidt#return1

You also might want to read about this JH guy first, here.

http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt08/haidt08_index.html

He traveled to India and found his liberal ideas lacking in his experience there, not sure I got it completely and it did confuse me a bit reading that then what seemed a contradiction on his views about gay marraige in the article we will hopefully be discussing.

If this type of discussion is way to heavy for this site, please let me know, because I would rather be where I might learn something as well as a place to share trivial discussion.

I have to go to work, but I scanned, very quickly, the first site interview.

These are philisophical inquiries, so I'm wondering exactly what part of these inquiries you want to discuss.

What are morals? How do they differ from value?
What determines our morals and how do we decide where to place value?

Am I on the right track. Let me know and I will review the sites and respond when I get home.

A great day to everyone. This could be an interesting topic, thanks boo2u.

Well I don't know as a liberal how far I can stretch to compromise with the other side on anything, I am just now starting to find out if there is any compromise because I hate all this sniping back and forth. And I wonder if there are conservatives and liberals willing to stretch at all, so any part of the discussion is fine with me, but I guess it's mostly still having to do with the gay marriage issue and our preconceived notions on both sides that might keep us from coming together on this issue of gay marriage or morality.

I am not sure where it will begin or end but lets just go by what comes to mind naturally first?!!

that was interesting (got a 404 error on the first link though)

reminds me of when Malcom X went on Haj to Mecca and discovered that Islam wasn't a black thing at all and came home with a new perspective (which got him killed)

For some odd reason it is not working by clicking on it, but if you copy and paste the full url it comes up.. weird but I can't seem to edit the first post. Sorry about that.

I'll try posting it here with out the bbcode brackets or wait maybe try this with out the return thing at the end.
http://www.believermag.com/issues/200508/?read=interview_haidt

This is interesting.
I always thought that I came to my conclusions about gay marriage, and other things by learning about them. Now I have to reconsider and say that I might not have been as judgmental in my youth as I myself would describe me.
I don't know whether I have made myself clear.
I have grown up with the prejudices my parents taught, and only in my late teens, when I actually talked to gay people, and socialized with them, changed my mind completely.

It is interesting isn't it, really makes you stretch painfully in some ways and not in others. I too grew up with a horrid prejudice of the Japanese because of my fathers attitude during the war. Never even realized I was until I examined my thoughts when I was first exposed to Japanese people. Inside I felt it was irrational but I didn't know why, then much later I found out where it came from and I got rid of it, and have never felt that way again. Thankfully. Now if I could deal with my anger toward Christians and conservatives, I would feel another accomplishment, but I have to know more first.

I think it means we have to go to the deepest roots within ourselves, find out who planted them there, and why.
It will be a hard journey, and not so pleasant I guess, because it means learning something about ourselves we probably don't want to know.

Funny, or not so funny I got that same feeling, this could be educational to both sides and not all that pleasant if one has a hard time with letting go of preconcieved notions. Of course I would question JH's motives here too, though I understand his urg to understand both sides, if only to stop the craziness on both sides that is self inflicted. I am not quite as concerned about what the other side might be doing wrong as I am about my own contribution to what is wrong with our society. After all I know me best and I don't know others as well as I do me.

That seems to be part of the problem? That we are not examining ourselves as much as we are looking at others? Ack, some times it's amazing to me that I got to 58 and still have so so much to learn.

Well, I sometimes, while trying to find out why I like or dislike someone or something, examine my own motives. And I have to say I'm not always pleased with my findings. But I find it hard to teach an old dog new tricks, meaning, I have some attitudes that I have a hard time with changing.

I am at the very least impressed with the fact that you consider changing at all. If I had not changed considerably over time, I would be a very different person right now and not one I would find all that fun to be around. Today I can actually say that I like who I am, I was not always able to say that. And though I have a long way to go, it still excites me to learn even when it's not so comfortable.

Change can't be avoided if we want to evolve into better humans. I like myself a lot more than I did a few years ago, but there are still so many flaws I have to work on. But I will not give up working on myself.

Ah then I will be in good company, Invisible.

Well actually I don't know if it's the board or what...but I know libs & we discuss things all the time without arguing & hating eachother. I think the best conversations I've had are with people who ...at the end of the day we can take some of my best ideas & melt it with some of the best of their ideas to come up with something that actually works.

You won't get that with political animals. This board & the general religion board are two boards where most people just want to argue.

If you want civil discussion about Christianity without the Christian bashing bigot club they got going on, come to the christian singles. Maybe they should do the same with the politics board...make a split (CON/LIB)... & people have to be civil if they are in that board. Then MAYBE you will get civil discussion. Best to you on that one.

I think listening with your brain and actually absorbing what people are saying and examining it with an open mind is the key.Many people are black and white thinkers.Me,I know there are grey areas and I try not to close my mind off to other people's perspectives or points of view.It's good to agree to disagree sometimes.

This is the first I have seen you say the word lib or liberal with out sarcasm QuickStepper, so i am a bit surprised your even here. But never the less, I wouldn't find a captive audience in a Christian singles or other Christian forum, because I have found they don't want to look at things from any point of view that isn't strictly Christian or biblical, so we end up getting nowhere or back the same old arguments.

I don't want this topic to be from a biblical point of view of gay marriage or morality, because we already know what that is. I want to discuss with people that aren't completely closed off to an other view point. I don't know what a political animal is, I came here because I see that there are people willing to discuss differing points of view that are not biblically based so that is where I wanted to start, with people that really like to discuss different points of view that don't necessarily bother them to discuss. Not sure I am making sense, it's getting late for me.

The Christian friends I have do not take the bible literally. The ones that do we can not discuss this because when you do they feel attacked and dismissed, so there is no way to discuss it with them with out heated argument no one wants.

This was a great read, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I have often found it difficult to declare myself as either conservative or liberal. Similar to boo2u; I purposely stayed out of politics. For me, staying out of it was a personal rebellion against a system that was so completely staged, that I felt more like a pawn rather than a part of it. It’s only been the last 10 years that I’ve gained a bit more perspective.

The most confusing part of the system was trying to understand what makes conservatives and liberals so oppositional.

Haidt explains that part of his theory includes “four foundations of moral sense”, Aversion to Suffering, Reciprocity; Fairness, and Equality Hierarchy; Respect, and Duty; Purity and Pollution.
He believes that liberals use two of them, while conservatives use all four. But what we have to understand is that Haidt is discussing the two extremes. In reality most political theorists now suggest the chart of conservative and liberal is more like a square. The extreme conservatives in one block, the extreme liberals in another, and then there are the liberals that include certain conservative points of view and the conservatives that include certain liberal points of view.

On the four quadrants square, I would imagine that the liberal/conservative square might include the two moral foundations of the liberals and one of the conservative, while the conservative/liberal square includes two of the conservative and one of the liberal. Somehow I find this to be a more accurate picture by today’s standards. I think because there are so many Christians who are now becoming less “fundamentally” inspired by scripture and at the same this new development has brought people back into the fold of Christianity simply because they can now have their faith without the entire strict adherence to “fundamentalism.”

This might explain the two new squares in political theory. Though I can’t say how Haidt would interpret the two squares, I personally think they exist because people are communicating more, maybe not with each other, but with the world. The internet is the greatest data base of human knowledge to ever exist. In the U.S. more households have access to the internet than not. Could the structural change in political theory be the affect of the internet?

So – just for kicks, look at the “four foundations of moral sense”
Aversion to Suffering
Reciprocity, Fairness, and Equality
Hierarchy, Respect, and Duty
Purity and Pollution

No matter how you view where you stand in politics, or even if you are not an American at all, what foundations do YOU think apply to you?

I score higher on the first two and a bit lower on the last two though when I took that test I found it very lacking and didn't allow for answering the questions in a different way.

Sorry there...you missed my point...I was saying that like the Christian singles board where it more civil because you are REQUIRED to be civil, if they had a LIB board and a CON board where the other was required to be civil... you might get some real discussion without all the hostility that goes on... If you go to the gen religion board then go to Christian singles you will see what I mean about being civil as opposed to the trolling that goes on in the GRB.

That's what I'm talking about.... Yu know...Christians may not agree with you but they would never bash you like what is done on the gen religion or politics board. That's the difference.

You are right...my sarcasm is humor toward some of the absurdities I see posted on these boards. I have not really personally attacked anyone here like I have been attacked & many others who just stopped posting because they were visciously attacked by the Rat Pac for disagreeing with them & they know there won't be any real honest discussion about anything.

I can take it as well as dish it out. Some here want to dish it out but get offended when they get slammed back. That's the difference. Is it worth getting kicked or getting threatening e-mails by mods? Not really... so that's where it's at. I guess unless people calm down you won't see any real discussion.

Best to you tho...I hope you succeed.

Both sides Con and Lib are equally at fault here, I think you might agree with that. It really doesn't matter who starts it, but it always seems to be hot button items that get the craziness going. I think I have learned that in a public forum like this some people's only purpose is to start a topic they know will start a fight.

I look for real discussion and though I am not above playful trivia, I prefer discussion. When that is interupted by sexual inuendo and whatever, the discussion becomes confusing and disconnected.

Unfortunately one can't always be prepared for some of the absolutely uninformed things people say and not hanging out very often in public forums I have to admit that at times I wear my heart on my sleeve.

I don't know that we can ever get past our divisions which seem to be the most popular topics, and I don't know if there can ever be a really in depth discussion of these issues with Christians because the Biblical views so immutable, but I find I try every now then even though I expect it won't work well for me in the end.

That's why mostly religion and politics is so often not a favorite topic on either side in the real world.

I know that I have found some of the things you have posted very offensive and hurtful, and I thought to myself, geez, I don't even know this women, why does it bother me so much.

We can all pretend we are above being hurt by others words, but if we are really honest, they absolutely do hurt, doesn't matter if it's a best friend or a stranger.

So QuickStepper, despite the fact that I have been angered by your words and responded in kind out of frustration, I call a truce because I think that despite what you believe that I might not, you have been genuine in your response here. .

And I appreciate that you did add your voice to this topic. I don't know how long I will be able to handle this site and keep my nerves in tact. LOL But I will know that there are a great deal of people out there willing to hear my side of things and consider them, most times that enough for me.