9th Marines wrote:
This from "The Week", 5 Dec 2014.
Alas, virtually all of us respond to emotionally loaded issues in a visceral way, and then reason backward to the conclusion that feels right because it buttresses what we already believe. The stronger people's political and moral values, social scientists have found, the more reflexively they react to any hot button debate. "Morality binds and blinds," says social psychologist Jonathan Haidt in his superb book, "The Righteous Mind. "It binds us into idealogical teams that fight each other as through the fate of the world depended on our side winning each battle." That much, at least is inarguable. Duke University researchers recently presented self-identified liberals and conservatives with evidence contradicting their views on gun ownership and c*****e c****e, respectively. Since neither group liked the policy implications of the evidence, each imply dismissed is lies. Motivated reasoning, as social psychologists call this phenomenon, is highly rewarding. It wards off the discomfort we feel when our preconceptions are challenged. It binds us further to our "tribe," filling us with the warm glow of impregnable certainty. But as Haidt points out, self-rightous partisanship has a steep cost: "It blinds us to the fact that each team is composed of good people who have something important to say."
It seems to me that this describes the bulk of posters on this site.
This from "The Week", 5 Dec 2014. br b... (
show quote)