E46 BMW Social Directory E46 FAQ 3-Series Discussion Forums BMW Photo Gallery BMW 3-Series Technical Information E46 Fanatics - The Ultimate BMW Resource BMW Vendors General E46 Forum The Tire Rack's Tire Wheel Forum Forced Induction Forum The Off-Topic The E46 BMW Showroom For Sale, For Trade or Wanting to Buy

Welcome to the E46Fanatics forums. E46Fanatics is the premiere website for BMW 3 series owners around the world with interactive forums, a geographical enthusiast directory, photo galleries, and technical information for BMW enthusiasts.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Everything Else > The Off-Topic > Political Talk

Political Talk
You may discuss anything regarding politics in this forum ONLY. If you cannot respect others opinions, your access to this forum will be removed.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-27-2014, 10:49 AM   #41
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,299
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
huh
Quote:
As an aside, I think the "thinness" of the liberal moral worldview may explain a phenomenon that has puzzled me, which is the speed at which liberal views harden into orthodoxy and the willingness of liberals to use various forms of compulsion to enforce that orthodoxy. Consider same-sex marriage. For conservatives, this is actually quite a difficult topic and one sees a wide variety of opinion and discussion on the "conservative" side of the fence. "Conservative" opinion is not uniformly opposed to same-sex marriage and conservatives who support same-sex marriage are not ostracized or silenced for doing so. I think Haidt gives a sense why: same-sex marriage cuts across a lot of these moral dimensions in different ways-it simultaneously triggers sanctity (for religious conservatives) and authority (tradition), but it also triggers equality/fairness impulses and care/harm impulses for the individuals affected by it. So conservatives, I think, tend to see it as an issue on which reasonable minds can disagree and that those who hold contrasting views are not generally thought to be immoral or evil. I think this sense that there is room for legitimate disagreement is also consistent with the one near-consensus view of conservatives, which is that regardless of one's position on the issue there is no constitutional right to same-sex marriage, as opposed to allowing the issue to evolve through democratic processes that permit disparate moral and other views to be heard and compromised.
So according to this, "conservatives" are ok with other "conservative"s feeling oppression of civil rights is ok, because those civil rights might be "fair", but they might also be contrary to "sanctity". So it's ok to deny rights as long as you can justify it in some "moral" sense, say, tradition of the church. Whereas "liberals" don't accept "liberals" who say that some civil rights can be denied based on some other "moral" justification. They say that civil rights trumps church tradition every time.
__________________
NOVAbimmer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 10:50 AM   #42
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 506
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
go figure
Wonder if he has a citation that links to a psychology study regarding the functions of the subconscious he mentions. Are his views on psychology anecdotal also?
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 10:50 AM   #43
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Smyrna
Posts: 127
My Ride: 2005 330cic ZHP
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolved View Post
I would love to see the questions, actually.
Haven't found them but haven't looked very hard. No doubt the phrasing of each question would be important - could reveal some prejudice or bias. He did ask the same questions of both self-identified groups, so bias should be minimized. But we all know certain words have subtle meanings that could provoke stronger responses by one side v. the other.

But congrats for a thoughtful response. Everyone else in here has done nothing but prove those two sentences - much more entertaining than I expected!
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 10:51 AM   #44
evolved
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Posts: 816
My Ride: 2011 BMW 135i
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post

Right. Also, I am really curious how each has fared throughout history.
I really think the questions asked are crucially important to understanding Haidt's results. Were the same questions asked of both sides, or were they different questions depending on the persons self selected ideology?
__________________

Present
2011 BMW 135i - BSM
Past
2006 Mazdaspeed 6 GT, 2000 BMW 323ci, 2003 Evolution VIII, 1995 Nissan 240sx w/ SR20DET

E46Sig
evolved is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 10:53 AM   #45
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,299
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
more:
Quote:
Liberals, by contrast, appear to broach little disagreement from the orthodoxy on this issue (and others for that matter), and I think Haidt gives us a sense why. If they are processing this only through the care and fairness moral value frameworks, then that implies that only immoral people could be opposed to same-sex marriage. And if these people are immoral, then their opposition is hateful and unjustified. So a notion quickly hardens into an orthodoxy-no moral person could oppose same sex marriage. It is then a logical step to a willingness to demonize and try to silence opponents of same-sex marriage as holding not just wrong-headed but illegitimate views, much like the Inquisition, which was premised on the idea that there is potential harm and no value in tolerating "error." ('That's an oversimplification of the Inquisition, of course.) Ditto for more petty forms of censorship and suppression of speech, such as university speech codes.
Very, very close to an "ad Nazium", but at least he sort of acknowledges it.

Again, more of the same. Liberals don't view issues through a "well, this is what my religion says, so this is what should be happening here" paradigm. It seems that religious liberals are more likely to say "my religion says X, but that doesn't mean my government should say X as well"
__________________
NOVAbimmer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 10:56 AM   #46
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,299
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
even more
Quote:
One thing about Haidt is that my general impression is that by and large libertarians are often particularly skeptical of Haidt's methodology and conclusions. To some extent that skepticism is warranted: Haidt (by disposition a liberal) conflates an analytical distinction that is crucial for libertarians: the distinction between an act being immoral and illegal. Haidt implicitly assumes that because an act is thought of as moral (i.e., the desire for everyone to have access to health insurance or recycling) it should be mandated and if something is immoral (i.e., drugs or pornography) it should be prohibited. That obviously conflates two different categories. On the other hand, to some extent that skepticism is unwarranted: libertarians insist on that logical distinction, but the reality is that libertarians are a very small percentage of the population. So, in fact, even if Haidt's conflation of the two categories is not logically defensible, it seems to me that within the scope of his project it is quite defensible-if he is seeking to simply describe and predict how people think, he seems on solid ground in working from the assumption that most people-liberals and conservatives alike-do not draw that distinction and implicitly do conflate morality and legality.
That's a huge, huge assumption to be making, and one that should be specifically and explicity stated in his report on his research.
__________________
NOVAbimmer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 11:06 AM   #47
Zell
Registered User
 
Zell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Such City
Posts: 5,640
My Ride: '02 Dogemobile Shibe
ITT thread about how liberals think they're always right due to extremely biased subconscious world views due to sifting through their own self-justifying data that they find, from a conservative who is 100% sure he's right from data that he gathered and measured himself.

That's objectively what this thread is about.
__________________

Last edited by Zell; 01-27-2014 at 11:07 AM.
Zell is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 11:07 AM   #48
Rhumb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 100
My Ride: 2001 M3 Coupe
Quote:
Are Liberals Less Likely to Understand Conservatives' Views?
I would agree as there is far less to understand and more to simply conform to.
Rhumb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 11:09 AM   #49
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Smyrna
Posts: 127
My Ride: 2005 330cic ZHP
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'busa View Post
Have you? Has anyone?

Good topic, though. Brilliant minds?

I feel like Haidt has tried to toe the line between the two ideologies, but has clearly fallen on the more conservative side, hence the perception that conservative views are more often misunderstood.

That said, looking back a hundred years or so, have conservative views been judged favorably by history? Or would that be more liberal views? Honest question.



Right. Also, I am really curious how each has fared throughout history.

Pretty much.
Props to you, busa - I honestly didn't recall that you had posted about this previously and I didn't search prior to making my thread. Since you pointed this out, I do now recall your thread and thinking I needed some time to dive into it, but just forgot and never went back to it. My apologies for stepping on your topic!

I have not finished the book (about 2/3 through) and haven't picked it up in 2 months, so I fear I may need to start over!

As for Haidt's tilt to conservatives, I haven't assessed his entire body of work so I cannot comment. I assume you have, hence your declaration?

As for the historical judgment of conservative and liberal views, haven't considered the question much since you just asked it. My initial reaction is that as of this moment, the judgment is much more harsh of conservative views. Liberals have successfully pre-empted the badge of care and concern to the exclusion of conservatives - just watch any PT thread descend into "well, you just hate ____ people" tactic by liberals when they don't have a better argument to make. It is a smart tactic, since many/most conservatives hate being called hateful more than anything, and will quickly withdraw from a debate.
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 11:14 AM   #50
badfast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Northern Korea
Posts: 506
My Ride: A Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabrio330 View Post
Props to you, busa - I honestly didn't recall that you had posted about this previously and I didn't search prior to making my thread. Since you pointed this out, I do now recall your thread and thinking I needed some time to dive into it, but just forgot and never went back to it. My apologies for stepping on your topic!

I have not finished the book (about 2/3 through) and haven't picked it up in 2 months, so I fear I may need to start over!

As for Haidt's tilt to conservatives, I haven't assessed his entire body of work so I cannot comment. I assume you have, hence your declaration?

As for the historical judgment of conservative and liberal views, haven't considered the question much since you just asked it. My initial reaction is that as of this moment, the judgment is much more harsh of conservative views. Liberals have successfully pre-empted the badge of care and concern to the exclusion of conservatives - just watch any PT thread descend into "well, you just hate ____ people" tactic by liberals when they don't have a better argument to make. It is a smart tactic, since many/most conservatives hate being called hateful more than anything, and will quickly withdraw from a debate.
If I say you hate non biased commentaries, studies, and ideas will you withdraw from the debate?
badfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 11:18 AM   #51
rdsesq
ouroboros autorotica
 
rdsesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cali...the only state that matters
Posts: 1,452
My Ride: 2002 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabrio330 View Post
For one explanation, read:

Why Won’t They Listen?
‘The Righteous Mind,’ by Jonathan Haidt

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/bo...aidt.html?_r=0

I especially like this part - shines some light on how the minds work, or don't work, with many of the more active liberal posters in PT:



Unfortunately I could not find a link to this article via Forbes so I had to use the liberal fishwrap NY Times. The usual suspects in here will have to work just a little bit harder to discredit the source, sorry guys.
However, Haidt's entire supposition is predicated on the concept that morality exists and is a good thing. It is a perception, and not an objective fact. Hence, while he can accumulate any data he wants, which is still anecdotal no matter the sample size, if the premise is flawed, biased, and non-objective the findings are not of import.
__________________
"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon."
-- Dr Manhattan

quis custodiet ipsos custodes
rdsesq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 11:19 AM   #52
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,299
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
Just look at civil rights for a historical perspective on conservative vs liberal views. Lincoln may have been a republican, but he definitely wasn't a conservative.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
__________________
NOVAbimmer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 11:23 AM   #53
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,299
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdsesq View Post
However, Haidt's entire supposition is predicated on the concept that morality exists and is a good thing. It is a perception, and not an objective fact. Hence, while he can accumulate any data he wants, which is still anecdotal no matter the sample size, if the premise is flawed, biased, and non-objective the findings are not of import.
Morality does exist, but it is not necessarily objective. What is morally right or wrong varies by culture. Legislating based on what is moral, therefore, becomes tricky.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
__________________
NOVAbimmer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 04:34 PM   #54
Lair
E46Fanatic
 
Lair's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Council housing
Posts: 320
My Ride: 330ciC
I understand their views. I just don't understand why they have those views.

Is it hate? Indoctrination? A predisposition for self-flagellation? Childhood abuse?
__________________

Quote:
Are you following him?

Yes.
Congratulations.
Lair is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 05:47 PM   #55
MDydinanM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Coast
Posts: 754
My Ride: is a ///M
oy, my head hurts
MDydinanM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 07:34 PM   #56
bimmerfan08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 4,890
My Ride: Phoenix Yellow M3
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDydinanM View Post
oy, my head hurts
__________________
"Economics cannot answer such normative or prescriptive questions about how much of our market incomes, if any, should be transferred to poor families. This is a political question that can only be answered at the ballot box, or in some countries, at the point of a gun."
bimmerfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2014, 11:30 PM   #57
rdsesq
ouroboros autorotica
 
rdsesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Cali...the only state that matters
Posts: 1,452
My Ride: 2002 330i
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
Morality does exist, but it is not necessarily objective. What is morally right or wrong varies by culture. Legislating based on what is moral, therefore, becomes tricky.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
Legislating based on "morality" isn't tricky, it's tacky.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
__________________
"The existence of life is a highly overrated phenomenon."
-- Dr Manhattan

quis custodiet ipsos custodes
rdsesq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 05:24 AM   #58
bimmerfan08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 4,890
My Ride: Phoenix Yellow M3
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdsesq View Post
Legislating based on "morality" isn't tricky, it's tacky.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
__________________
"Economics cannot answer such normative or prescriptive questions about how much of our market incomes, if any, should be transferred to poor families. This is a political question that can only be answered at the ballot box, or in some countries, at the point of a gun."
bimmerfan08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 05:32 AM   #59
NOVAbimmer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: VA
Posts: 12,299
My Ride: 14 Impala FXST M796
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdsesq View Post
Legislating based on "morality" isn't tricky, it's tacky.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
Whatever.

Of course morality exists, and you don't need quotation marks around it.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
__________________
NOVAbimmer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2014, 06:50 AM   #60
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Smyrna
Posts: 127
My Ride: 2005 330cic ZHP
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
Whatever.

Of course morality exists, and you don't need quotation marks around it.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app
Just remember, rdsesq is on your side of the political spectrum. Of course on my side is that twit women candidate that thinks autism is punishment for gays or whatever, so I feel your embarrassment!
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Censor is ON





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
(c) 1999 - 2011 performanceIX Inc - privacy policy - terms of use