Friday, January 2, 2009
Politics Re: There is No Morality Without Religion
Posted by Eli Sanders on Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 2:00 PM
I thought of one of Dan's Slog obsessions when I watched this TED Talk the other night. It argues a few things: 1) There's no politics without moral judgment. 2) Moral judgment is an evolutionary adaptation. 3) What makes a person "liberal" or "conservative" has more to do with that person's particular form of evolutionary hard-wiring than with what we normally call morality.
Which means, if true and taken to an extreme, that there's really no Morality at all, never mind where it comes from. There's just moral psychology.
Via OpenLeft.
Share via
1
Studies trying to prove that ideology is hard-wired are getting a lot of play lately. I disagree entirely. You can explain right and wrong to people; low information is the problem.
3
The fact that most religious folks who believe in the bible do not, in fact, publicly stone people to death for such offenses as working on the sabbath, being homosexual, or other such infractions, proves that morals do not, in fact, come from the bible.
Luckily for us, most people, even those with strong religious convictions, use very similar morals that are derived from the amygdala and orbit-frontal cortex. The brain has basic morals fairly hard-wired into it. Even religious folks tend to read the bible selectively through the lens of a properly functioning brain.
True there are many people for whom this is not the case. However, in general, people with normally functioning brains have some base set of morals that definitively do not come from religion.
The study of morals is quite interesting. There are a lot of interesting studies about the brain using fMRI and PET scans. These scans done during series of questions such as the Trolley problem result in some very interesting things.
Luckily for us, most people, even those with strong religious convictions, use very similar morals that are derived from the amygdala and orbit-frontal cortex. The brain has basic morals fairly hard-wired into it. Even religious folks tend to read the bible selectively through the lens of a properly functioning brain.
True there are many people for whom this is not the case. However, in general, people with normally functioning brains have some base set of morals that definitively do not come from religion.
The study of morals is quite interesting. There are a lot of interesting studies about the brain using fMRI and PET scans. These scans done during series of questions such as the Trolley problem result in some very interesting things.
4
@1 - plenty of conservatives have access to the same information as liberals, and yet are conservative anyway. We all fit the information we receive into our preferred ideological structures and prejudices. Low information has nothing to do with it.
7
@3: Yes, but it's when the researchers, or the people reporting on the research, try to map biology to the idiosyncratic, random, bizarre political spectrum you find in the U.S. that irritates me. The American political spectrum, historically accrued, of two parties with issues randomly shoveled between them, is not logical. We'll take abortion, y'all take the death penalty... Add the fact that our political parties do not tend to create a platform and stick with it, but tend to run personalities instead of party platforms. Then there's the tendency since Clinton (at least) of stealing your opponent's successful issues. "Conservative" and "liberal" also mean different things in different countries. I can't help thinking these studies are sponsored by the Discovery Institute.
Maybe Stanley Milgram's research would apply best to these questions. Maybe it's important that these theses be speedily proven wrong with the newly available imaging technology. The researchers' definitions of political leanings would be a bellwhether.
Maybe Stanley Milgram's research would apply best to these questions. Maybe it's important that these theses be speedily proven wrong with the newly available imaging technology. The researchers' definitions of political leanings would be a bellwhether.
11
@7 - there actually is a logic to our political system, but I didn't really think too much of it until I read George Lakoff's book "Don't think of an Elephant."
A lot of Lakoff's work examines categories and their relationships to each other and us. He ends up with some great insights. I think he's something of a genius.
http://www.chelseagreen.com/authors/geor…
A lot of Lakoff's work examines categories and their relationships to each other and us. He ends up with some great insights. I think he's something of a genius.
http://www.chelseagreen.com/authors/geor…
12
@7 - You really should watch the video. While obviously nobody in either party is happy with the entirety of either party's platform, this isn't about the U.S. political system; it's about "openness to experience", which in turn maps to a general political inclination: conservative vs. progressive. In fact, this mostly has to do with social issues, though I think (especially from the progressive side) one could argue that all issues are social issues. Conservatives tend to have very rigid, well-defined social structures that make them comfortable, while progressives are more open to experimentation and novelty. You can't dispute that this dichotomy exists, in some form, in any society in the world, and indeed within any individual - but within an individual one or the other inclination will win out.
13
Has anyone ever wondered how many neocons could dance on the end of a pin?
Well, if not, imagine if it were a very sharp stake.
Most of those who preach about morality have none.
Well, if not, imagine if it were a very sharp stake.
Most of those who preach about morality have none.
14
Again, thanks for posting this, Eli. This talk holds the key, I believe, to resolving our political disagreements. Seriously. We're smart, we can figure this stuff out without getting emotional, which only holds us back.
15
Exactly, David.
I mean, look how many smart educated people there are in the Middle East - I'm sure they'll solve their problems before the sun goes dark.
I mean, look how many smart educated people there are in the Middle East - I'm sure they'll solve their problems before the sun goes dark.
16
re: 2) Moral judgement is an evolutionary adaptation.
May I suggest this excellent blog post about how contemporaries twist evolution to explain our social behaviour.
http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2…
cheers
May I suggest this excellent blog post about how contemporaries twist evolution to explain our social behaviour.
http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2…
cheers
17
@15 - Yeah, I guess where there aren't smart educated people we should just keep blowing them up until they get some.
What's your point, exactly?
What's your point, exactly?
18
What? No!
Why, if morality is, to whatever extent, hard-wired, and something we evolved to have, should we think of it as being less real? You could argue that it is, under those circumstances, MORE real than if it were just one of those things that sociologists study.
Why, if morality is, to whatever extent, hard-wired, and something we evolved to have, should we think of it as being less real? You could argue that it is, under those circumstances, MORE real than if it were just one of those things that sociologists study.
20
My guess is that being open to experience depends on how you grew up. If you lived somewhere that couldn't afford school field trips and with Fox News as your only news source, where 1 in 10 men was a Vietnam veteran practicing survivalism in the woods, you'll be more afraid of the unknown than eurotrash kids who have traveled safely and enjoyably to many countries by the time they graduate from high school. European kids know the world is beautiful and safe and better when shared. Redneck kids know that hell is other people.
21
Amelia @20- As it happens, I grew up in Eastern Kentucky and was homeschooled by fundamentalist Christian parents, weaned on Rush Limbaugh. I know conservatism from the inside, and I grew out of it. It's precisely because of, what I would say is an built-in openness to experience that I have, and perhaps my relatives lack to the same degree, that I sought out foreign experiences and turned myself into a card-carrying West Coast progressive. More information alone don't cut it; it just gets ignored or rationalized. In fact, rationalizing contradictory facts is (quite maddeningly) what conservatives do best. Did you pay attention to the words that came out of Sarah Palin's mouth? How anyone who paid attention could tell she didn't know what the hell she was talking about? And how, in spite of that, millions of heartland conservatives still think she's the Great White Hope?
22
@21: Right. I was speaking from experience (obviously). You have to leave the U.S. to get a real sense of the proportions. Even in Canada, the "conservative" papers are to our left. At this point in U.S. history, if you'd stayed here your whole life you could be forgiven for thinking your personal escape was due to an accident of DNA.
When I escaped this bubble to study abroad, I was amazed that the U.S. often seemed to have more in common with Russia, as a result of the Cold War, than it did with Western Europe.
Because of my redneck education, the best quick explanation of politics I ever saw was a recent Mort Sahl routine. (Bless Mort Sahl!) He had magnetic head shots of famous leaders, including Stalin, Hitler, and Bill Clinton, and he threw them onto a white board from left to right with great, pithy explanations. Taught my libertarian date a hell of a lot. Cathartic for me.
About the Palin: I think people could very easily put together a short film that would end any lingering Palin euphoria in folks still harboring it. Combine footage of her looking cross-eyed, fat or with her fake hair blown by the wind with footage of her actually talking. Add in true facts from her family life. Find out why she's so skinny. You wouldn't have to discuss issues.
However, you'd have to get airplay on corporate (sorry) media; and if we could mass broadcast that kind of propaganda the Republicans would have an even freer field to do so.
When I escaped this bubble to study abroad, I was amazed that the U.S. often seemed to have more in common with Russia, as a result of the Cold War, than it did with Western Europe.
Because of my redneck education, the best quick explanation of politics I ever saw was a recent Mort Sahl routine. (Bless Mort Sahl!) He had magnetic head shots of famous leaders, including Stalin, Hitler, and Bill Clinton, and he threw them onto a white board from left to right with great, pithy explanations. Taught my libertarian date a hell of a lot. Cathartic for me.
About the Palin: I think people could very easily put together a short film that would end any lingering Palin euphoria in folks still harboring it. Combine footage of her looking cross-eyed, fat or with her fake hair blown by the wind with footage of her actually talking. Add in true facts from her family life. Find out why she's so skinny. You wouldn't have to discuss issues.
However, you'd have to get airplay on corporate (sorry) media; and if we could mass broadcast that kind of propaganda the Republicans would have an even freer field to do so.
Most Commented on Slog
-
Life and Death in a Recliner in South Carolina by Dan Savage
-
Pit Bulls! by Dan Savage
-
Becoming a Man by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Hot & Drunk by Dan Savage
-
$2,600,000,000 by Dan Savage
-
All The Best Men Are Taken by Dan Savage
-
I Hate You, Garrison Keillor by Jen Graves
-
Unreal Americans by Dan Savage
-
Precious: Brutal New Classic or African-American Bruno? by David Schmader
-
Meanwhile in Vancouver by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (22) RSS