Cf. Jon Haidt's set of distinct "moral foundations" http://moralfoundations.org/ https://twitter.com/vgr/status/932112051312386048 …
-
-
Replying to @CircleReader
Kinda, except I think Haidt's version is morality-by-committee and rife with analytical weaknesses
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
I think he's talking about how cultures tend to form moral committees – and the idea that morality is a "committee" phenomenon with intuitive roots.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CircleReader
No my point is the moral foundations theory has the feel of a theory invented by committee. Morality as it exists has a more robust, elegant, and organic structure. His theory is like Ptolemaic egocentrism.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Is there an overview of that "robust, elegant and organic structure" that you would recommend?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CircleReader
That's my characterization of the underlying phenomenon not an alternative theory of it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Ah – what Haidt might call the "moral matrix" of a culture, as district from his "foundations" – the cuisine, not just the basic flavors.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
His problem is that what he views as the "incomplete" pieces for liberals (authority, sanctity) are actual bugs in tribal thinking that weaken their epistemology, not "missing" elements of liberal morality. Ignoring that cost breaks the theory.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.