Six axis of foundation (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Phydeaux -> Six axis of foundation (2/6/2016 10:29:37 PM)

Interesting articles

http://heterodoxacademy.org/2016/01/07/new-study-finds-conservative-social-psychologists/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Foundations_Theory

http://projectimplicit.net/nosek/papers/GHN2009.pdf


This one is brilliant: http://cbdr.cmu.edu/seminar/haidt.pdf






Phydeaux -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/6/2016 10:39:57 PM)

http://www.mindingthecampus.org/2016/02/a-conversation-with-jonathan-haidt/




vincentML -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 1:35:31 AM)

Nothing original to say here, folks. Phydeaux makes a list of internet links and believes we are all to be impressed by his wisdom, which is scarcely found elsewhere on these boards.

Pitiful posting, I think. A waste of digitals and band width.




bounty44 -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 4:47:25 AM)

I suppose comrade if you have a vested interest in preserving the status quo and even fostering your leftist agenda, and despite your claims about being a teacher and showing no general interest here in learning, not to mention minding being obnoxiously cynical and childishly presumptuous in your post---you can get away with what you've just said.

but setting you aside...

I was just reading something recently consistent with some of the thread (by the same folks even), about the left leaning progression in higher education. unfortunately I cant upload the graph but ive got a nice photo of the breakdown of liberals, moderates, conservatives from 1988 to 2014 in terms of their overall representation on the faculty.

in 88 it was roughly 42, 40 and 18 respectively. in 14 it was 60, 28 and 12.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/why-isnt-my-professor-conservative/

some text from the moral foundations theory wiki:

quote:

Various scholars have offered moral foundations theory as an explanation of differences between political progressives (liberals in the American sense) and conservatives and have suggested that it can explain variation in opinion on politically charged issues such as gay marriage and abortion. In particular, Haidt and fellow researchers have argued that progressives stress only two of the moral foundations (Care and Fairness) in their reasoning, and libertarians stress only two (Liberty and Fairness), while conservatives stress all six more equally.[1]

The Six Foundations

Values and their opposites
1.Care/harm: cherishing and protecting others.
2.Fairness/cheating: rendering justice according to shared rules. (Alternate name: Proportionality)
3.Liberty/oppression: the loathing of tyranny.
4.Loyalty/betrayal: standing with your group, family, nation. (Alternate name: Ingroup)
5.Authority/subversion: obeying tradition and legitimate authority. (Alternate name: Respect.)
6.Sanctity/degradation: abhorrence for disgusting things, foods, actions. (Alternate name: Purity.)


ive said or alluded to this on numerous occasions, we argue because we value different things.

unfortunately, in our human weakness/fallen nature, that all too often devolves into name calling and casting aspersions on the other side.

its stuff like this work and these thoughts that should/could give people from differing parts of the social/political spectrum more of an ability to talk with each other.

however, I still want liberals to move to cuba or Sweden.




Kirata -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 5:18:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Phydeaux makes a list of internet links and believes we are all to be impressed by his wisdom...

Mind-reading now, Vincent? My goodness, weren't the rabbit tricks enough?

K.





vincentML -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 7:23:35 AM)

quote:

I suppose comrade if you have a vested interest in preserving the status quo and even fostering your leftist agenda, and despite your claims about being a teacher and showing no general interest here in learning, not to mention minding being obnoxiously cynical and childishly presumptuous in your post---you can get away with what you've just said.
So, my leftist agenda is the status quo? In Venezuela maybe. How confused you are. Poor boy.




vincentML -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 7:35:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Phydeaux makes a list of internet links and believes we are all to be impressed by his wisdom...

Mind-reading now, Vincent? My goodness, weren't the rabbit tricks enough?

K.



Hello, K. Good to see your avatar again, sort of. My complaint up above is that I thought we had long ago agreed to refrain from posting links without comment at the beginning of the thread.




Kirata -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 7:36:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Interesting articles...

Here's a link to Jonathan Haidt's talk at TED:

The moral roots of liberals and conservatives

K.





Cinnamongirl67 -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 8:19:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Interesting articles...

Here's a link to Jonathan Haidt's talk at TED:

The moral roots of liberals and conservatives

K.




This was a video well worth watching, very interesting.




CodeOfSilence -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 9:23:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Interesting articles

http://heterodoxacademy.org/2016/01/07/new-study-finds-conservative-social-psychologists/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Foundations_Theory

http://projectimplicit.net/nosek/papers/GHN2009.pdf


This one is brilliant: http://cbdr.cmu.edu/seminar/haidt.pdf






I'm reading the report. It's not bad but what it does is basically crosscheck things with each other and say "it makes sense because what someone said somewhere is also said somewhere else" without developing any real argumentation grounded in anthropology or dialecticism or anything else .

It's no wonder that it's written / a compilation by/of primarily psychologists/psychiatrists. The entire DSM compilation is based on nothing more than a bunch of them sitting on conferences and voting on things. This is also why supposed actual diseases and conditions are changed continuously.The burden of proof is nowhere as weak as in this science including that of neuroscience and sociology which are far better sources for defining human behaviour.


I'll be a bit more specific. It barely touches, let alone scratches the surface. It seems to deny that "liberals" are big on community in their own way and the stability of their progressive institutions. If psychology stemmed from the three or six themes discussed here then there wouldn't be any conservatives or liberals. So it doesn't begin to question why people are in conflict with each other and if that conflict is illusionary or not.




Phydeaux -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 5:26:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CodeOfSilence

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Interesting articles

http://heterodoxacademy.org/2016/01/07/new-study-finds-conservative-social-psychologists/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_Foundations_Theory

http://projectimplicit.net/nosek/papers/GHN2009.pdf


This one is brilliant: http://cbdr.cmu.edu/seminar/haidt.pdf






I'm reading the report. It's not bad but what it does is basically crosscheck things with each other and say "it makes sense because what someone said somewhere is also said somewhere else" without developing any real argumentation grounded in anthropology or dialecticism or anything else .

It's no wonder that it's written / a compilation by/of primarily psychologists/psychiatrists. The entire DSM compilation is based on nothing more than a bunch of them sitting on conferences and voting on things. This is also why supposed actual diseases and conditions are changed continuously.The burden of proof is nowhere as weak as in this science including that of neuroscience and sociology which are far better sources for defining human behaviour.


I'll be a bit more specific. It barely touches, let alone scratches the surface. It seems to deny that "liberals" are big on community in their own way and the stability of their progressive institutions. If psychology stemmed from the three or six themes discussed here then there wouldn't be any conservatives or liberals. So it doesn't begin to question why people are in conflict with each other and if that conflict is illusionary or not.



I agree that the final paper does that - and I agree with the general tenor of your criticism.

I have often thought that there ought to be a codified dictionary of behaviors/tells and how the translate to psychologically.
Poor examples follow, but off the top of my head, they are what occurred

Musicians tie to music, tie to expressions of creativity, tie to increased sexual partners.
Using tampons has a correlation to sexual activity
certain faiths (I don't want to make this about religion) have either positive or negative correclations with sexual activities.

In other words, a dictionary of traits as a diagnostic/insight into psychological modelling. Similar to what people that are good a people reading (FBI profilers for example) do, but in a medical sociological context.

Interesting book in that context: Reading Emotion.




Phydeaux -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 5:46:57 PM)

(Sorry, not a reply to Code)

Take the red pill vincent...

So you're saying your post whose entire content is a personal attack (TOS violation) is somehow 'better" than some papers I got excited about?

I pity you.




satanscharmer -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/7/2016 7:00:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Interesting articles...

Here's a link to Jonathan Haidt's talk at TED:

The moral roots of liberals and conservatives

K.




That was a good video.

It would be great if more people realized the importance of having both sides, it seems like a dying breed. Unless I was too young and naive, the US used to do a much better job understanding this.




mnottertail -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/8/2016 8:12:00 AM)

The video was informative.

It is no revelation that rightwingers are authoritarian, however.





vincentML -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/8/2016 8:40:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

(Sorry, not a reply to Code)

Take the red pill vincent...

So you're saying your post whose entire content is a personal attack (TOS violation) is somehow 'better" than some papers I got excited about?

I pity you.


Not a personal attack but a reminder of the long agreed upon protocol in these Boards to refrain from posting links sans comments from the poster. Maybe a Kevlar vest would give you piece of mind.




vincentML -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/8/2016 10:20:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

Interesting articles...

Here's a link to Jonathan Haidt's talk at TED:

The moral roots of liberals and conservatives

K.



Good TED talk, K. It is interesting and enlightening to try to understand the moral underpinnings which are at cross-currents within humanity. But, Haidt suggests at the end, if I hear him right, that the way to achieve our goals is to win the hearts and minds of our opponents (conservatives if you are liberal and vice versa) The problem is that he ignores the historical methods used to persuade the opponents. Clearly, conservatives who so highly value order and authority (and abhor disorder) have employed physical power as a means to their ends. So, there is not very much hope that rational discourse will prevail.




Phydeaux -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/8/2016 11:16:04 AM)

I liked the TED talk despite its self-congratulatory tone.

Haidt (and other's) talk about being open to experience. Too smug by far.

I don't find liberals 'open' to going to things like accounting conferences. I don't find them open to picking farm vegetables for .25 / hr. So I dont think its correctly characterized by 'open'

So what is it?

I don't know.

Idea oriented - rather than result oriented
people oriented

It does not involve nitty detail
it does not involve being measured for a grade. Ie., having your opinions subject to critique.




mnottertail -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/8/2016 12:04:39 PM)

see, thats the trouble with nutsucker filters.

accounting conferences are neither democratic, nor republican.

Cockgargling like that is strictly a nutsucker phenomenon though.




Phydeaux -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/8/2016 12:28:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

see, thats the trouble with nutsucker filters.

accounting conferences are neither democratic, nor republican.

Cockgargling like that is strictly a nutsucker phenomenon though.



You're making my point for me.

Were the dimension actually "openness to new experience" you would find liberals at Tea Party conferences; you would find them driving garbage trucks. You would find them at accounting conferences - just for the experience of it.

You don't. Meaning that liberals are openness is not a good term to describe.




mnottertail -> RE: Six axis of foundation (2/8/2016 12:41:55 PM)

I have been to a Tea Party meeting, several in fact (and you think I am liberal) I have been to more county republican meetings than you have (and you think I am a liberal).

You are simply cockgargling again and still. You have no more fact or credible citation who is at nutsucker meetings, or driving garbage trucks, or accounting conferences, prove that nutsuckers go there with some credible citations for the fun of it. lets see the numbers.

You dont see nutsuckers at abortion clinics, anti-religious demonstrations, (ALTHOUGH YOU SEE ENTIRE NUTSUCKER STATES AT THE WELFARE OFFICE) and many other places, so openness isn't something that ANYONE would attribute to nutsuckers.





Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875