The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt
Summary
Physics, chemistry, and biology determine much of how the world around us operates. Social sciences seek to define similar principles that define how we interact with each other. In The Righteous Mind, Haidt gives us three intuitive metaphors to understand why it’s so hard to talk about politics and religion, particularly with our friends and family.
The Metaphors
The Rider and The Elephant
One Liner:
Intuition comes first; moral reasoning comes second.
So what:
When you’re asked about abortion or same-sex marriage, there’s something in your brain that swings to one side of the debate or the other. It’s physics. The elepant in your brain tugs the rider along. Then you generate a list of reasons to explain your position. Either “folks will take advantage of the state” or “the government has no right to tell me what to do with my body.” Rarely do our debates on policy arrive at… “look, this just makes me feel uncomfortable.”
We’ve been taught that logical rationale is the way to win an argument (if you don’t believe me, go watch a high school “debate” competition). So that’s what we do. However, the way to e-ffect change is to a-ffect it. We have to attack intuitive decisions at the intuitive level. Once the elephant has tugged the rider the only way to move it is to lure it with food, which means we have to know what it eats, which means we have to listen well to our friends and family. We have to understand their needs and wants before we can discuss politics or religion with them effectively.
Related books:
- Predictably Irrational
- Thinking, Fast and Slow
- Book of Brassie – we have to attack content anxiety with content solutions and process anxiety with process solutions.
The Six Culture Tastebuds
One Liner:
Just like different cultures yield different flavor preferences in their cuisine they yield different moral preferences in their interpretations of behaviors and choices.
So what:
Just like we can leverage our understanding of physics to launch satellites into orbit around Earth, we can use our understanding of our audience to connect. Connections within communities drive changes. Haidt created what he calls Moral Foundations Theory. He claims there are six primary “taste receptors” through which people around the world make intuitive value judgments.
- The Care/Harm Foundation (p. 153)
- The Fairness/Cheating Foundation (p. 158)
- The Loyalty/Betrayal Foundation (p. 161)
- The Authority/Subversion Foundation (p. 165)
- The Sanctity/Degradation Foundation (p. 170)
- The Liberty/Oppression Foundation (p. 197)
Haidt suggests that it’s impossible to find even representation of these taste receptors across any two party political system. He then evaluates the American political parties and concludes that the Republican party stimulates five of these tastebuds while the Democratic stimulates only two. The Republicans have a “tastier” platform, so they win.
Related books:
- If I Understood You, Would I Have This Look On My Face?
- Translating Myself And Others
We are 90% chimp and 10% bee
One Liner:
There exists an innate hive switch in each of us. When triggered, our hive switch bonds us with our peers and we compete as a group versus other groups instead of as individuals versus other individuals within our group.
So what:
Effective leaders find ways to trigger the hive switch in their followers. Religions invoke wonder (or fear). Heartbreak, like that following 9/11, fuels bonding within communities. World wonders inspire. As actors within communities, this metaphor arms us to understand the choices we make and the choices of others. Are we competing with each other for status, within our group? Have we built enough trust around a clear enough mission that we’re competing together against an other? Knowledge is power and this model is a useful tool.
Related books:
- Group Genius
- The Idea Factory
- It Could Happen Here
- Pale Blue Dot
Related shows:
- The Walking Dead
- The Last Dance