The Atheist Ethicist is critiquing Haidt. From what i can tell, i like this Haidt guy.
Basically, his claims were these:
Liberal morality can be understood as being grounded on two fundamental sets of principles – each of which can be related to some biological (evolutionary) trait. These are a prohibition on harm (founded on the evolutionary quality of kin selection), and the other is fairness or justice (founded on the evolutionary quality of reciprocal altruism). These values are premised on the idea that societies are made up of distinct individuals and the individual is the fundamental entity that makes up communities.
However, if we look at morality around the world, we find three more fundamental sets of values that liberals tend to ignore. These additional three foundations come from recognition that groups, not just individuals, have moral importance. In order to have a functioning group, we need more than principles concerning harm and justice. We need principles concerning loyalty, respect, and purity or sanctity.
Haidt also charged the liberal community with being opposed to diversity (or, at best, as lacking diversity). He pointed out that there was almost universal agreement in the room about certain (liberal) moral values, and that this has been obtained effectively by driving anybody who would hold a conflicting view out of the community. He pointed out how, at psychology conventions, the attendees make jokes about conservatives and create an atmosphere where somebody holding conservative values would feel very uncomfortable – would feel unwelcome.
This is only a response to your synopsis of Haidt; I haven’t read him, nor have I read the post at the Atheist Ethicist.
It may be true that cultures tend to value Loyalty, respect and sanctity as well as the aforementioned 2 foundational moral values. I will address loyalty to the group. This is as often as not an insidious virtue. While it may have its roots in family kinship and loyalty (i.e. in a vast cruel world we must protect our family first), as it expands it becomes tribalism, nationalism and racism. I would argue these are antithetical to morality. In history it has lead to countless atrocities, The Holocaust being the most obvious. The tragic war in Iraq being a more recent example (“SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!” bumper stickers are now ubiquitous.
When certain courageous soldiers made public on the torture happening in American Prisons they were ostracized and sometimes relieved of duty. Whistle blowers from are usually made to suffer, but theyare heroes and heroines.
Diversity is of course usually to be encouraged. If the particular diverse voices are Fascist, they should be made to feel uncomfortable. Tolerance has its limits; I tolerate all except the intolerant.
Comment by eduardo — January 21, 2008 @ 19:38
I just read what I posted; I apologize for not rereading and editing the typos etc.
Comment by eduardo — January 21, 2008 @ 19:41