Reading what you've written here reminds me of Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind" -- where he lays out the array of "foundational values" that people hold. If memory serves, his research that led to that book was motivated by a desire to help "liberals" or "progressives" be more effective in reaching the "conservative" members of the voting public. The research resulted in his being far more empathetic with the conservatives, understanding and respecting their valuing of institutions and the sacred, at the "right end" of the spectrum of foundational values. The "left end" of that spectrum--this all from my memory--placed primacy of value on things like individual choice. One of Haidt's key observations--to support your thesis here, John, is that the challenge is to realize that those at the other end of the value spectrum aren't evil, that there really are valid, albeit, different, foundational beliefs. He also, significantly, noted that those on the left had a much harder time respecting the conservative values than vice versa; conservatives agree with the value of individual choice, but place it lower than their respect for the sacred and for institutions. Liberals tend to reject categorically any notion of the "sacred".
(Again, this is all from memory, but I think accurately reflects the essence of his arguments, and does support your contention that these are truly deep differences in how we view the world, reality.)
That's a very good notion that we disagree because of our ways of being in the world, and because of how we learn to work through so disagreements. I was recently in Arizona, deep canvassing voters, door -to-door. The most important thing is listening, listening, and engaging that person where they are as very as I can. Even if I didn't get the response I was looking for, nearly every one of these conversations was respectful and gratifying. The person thanked and often took my hand to shake thanks. We agreed that we miss being able to disagree agreeably as it seems we used to be able to do. I think the key is listening. It disarms fear and builds trust
Monday evening was a great event, John! Professor Lovett's comments were intriguing and worthy of much deeper conversation. When you mentioned MacIntyre, I was wondering if you had in mind the "differences in how we see, experience, and understand the world... rooted in metaphysical and often theological premises (even when those premises are unstated or unexplored)." While the whole subject is complex, I think this gets to the heart of the matter. Thanks for another great post from SAR!
I'd like to read your book, but I fear much of your discussion are presented in polisylible form, which means I might need to reread passages to understand the depth of what your presenting. I'd love to be better adapted to disagree in a friendly way, thereby causing the other party(s) to ponder the "consequences" of their thinking. It's hard for me to cause the responder to think. I thoroughly enjoy your columns. Best wishes for you and your works to be successful.
Reading what you've written here reminds me of Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind" -- where he lays out the array of "foundational values" that people hold. If memory serves, his research that led to that book was motivated by a desire to help "liberals" or "progressives" be more effective in reaching the "conservative" members of the voting public. The research resulted in his being far more empathetic with the conservatives, understanding and respecting their valuing of institutions and the sacred, at the "right end" of the spectrum of foundational values. The "left end" of that spectrum--this all from my memory--placed primacy of value on things like individual choice. One of Haidt's key observations--to support your thesis here, John, is that the challenge is to realize that those at the other end of the value spectrum aren't evil, that there really are valid, albeit, different, foundational beliefs. He also, significantly, noted that those on the left had a much harder time respecting the conservative values than vice versa; conservatives agree with the value of individual choice, but place it lower than their respect for the sacred and for institutions. Liberals tend to reject categorically any notion of the "sacred".
(Again, this is all from memory, but I think accurately reflects the essence of his arguments, and does support your contention that these are truly deep differences in how we view the world, reality.)
That's a very good notion that we disagree because of our ways of being in the world, and because of how we learn to work through so disagreements. I was recently in Arizona, deep canvassing voters, door -to-door. The most important thing is listening, listening, and engaging that person where they are as very as I can. Even if I didn't get the response I was looking for, nearly every one of these conversations was respectful and gratifying. The person thanked and often took my hand to shake thanks. We agreed that we miss being able to disagree agreeably as it seems we used to be able to do. I think the key is listening. It disarms fear and builds trust
Great response, John... appreciate your insights here!
Monday evening was a great event, John! Professor Lovett's comments were intriguing and worthy of much deeper conversation. When you mentioned MacIntyre, I was wondering if you had in mind the "differences in how we see, experience, and understand the world... rooted in metaphysical and often theological premises (even when those premises are unstated or unexplored)." While the whole subject is complex, I think this gets to the heart of the matter. Thanks for another great post from SAR!
I'd like to read your book, but I fear much of your discussion are presented in polisylible form, which means I might need to reread passages to understand the depth of what your presenting. I'd love to be better adapted to disagree in a friendly way, thereby causing the other party(s) to ponder the "consequences" of their thinking. It's hard for me to cause the responder to think. I thoroughly enjoy your columns. Best wishes for you and your works to be successful.