User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 43 of 50 FirstFirst ... 33394041424344454647 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 430 of 498

Thread: Only Americans understand America...

  1. #421
    Points: 13,028, Level: 27
    Level completed: 43%, Points required for next Level: 522
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    13,028
    Level
    27
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyDog View Post
    Your rep power has maxed out again.
    What's rep power?

    Can it order me a hamburger or charge my vibrator?
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

  2. #422
    Original Ranter
    Points: 145,567, Level: 91
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 1,083
    Overall activity: 66.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Unenlightened
    Karma
    26080
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    42,501
    Points
    145,567
    Level
    91
    Thanks Given
    5,743
    Thanked 7,530x in 5,950 Posts
    Mentioned
    298 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    306
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    What's rep power?

    Can it order me a hamburger or charge my vibrator?
    ugh...
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  3. #423
    Points: 13,028, Level: 27
    Level completed: 43%, Points required for next Level: 522
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    13,028
    Level
    27
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    15
    This guy, Jonathan Haidt, is one of the best social researchers and commentators I have seen. He provided the only real light on what makes conservatives tick in an article I read a couple of years ago.

    Now he is expounding an obvious truth:

    A Bedouin proverb says, “Me against my brother, my brothers and me against my cousins, then my cousins and me against strangers.” Human beings are pretty good at uniting to fight at whatever level is most important at a given moment.

    One way is to focus on common threats, rather than on common ground, just as the Bedouin proverb suggests. It’s only the threat of the stranger that brings the extended family together. A physical attack by outsiders — like Pearl Harbor or 9/11 — binds people together like nothing else. But what if there is no such attack? Can trade competition with China do it? What about a threat we created ourselves?
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/07/op...=politics&_r=0
    But Americans need to understand the threat before they can react to it. And then they need to react to it in positive, not negative, ways.
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

  4. #424
    Points: 174,129, Level: 99
    Level completed: 12%, Points required for next Level: 3,521
    Overall activity: 81.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive1 year registered50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    25162
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    51,699
    Points
    174,129
    Level
    99
    Thanks Given
    3,722
    Thanked 9,378x in 7,335 Posts
    Mentioned
    499 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    This guy, Jonathan Haidt, is one of the best social researchers and commentators I have seen. He provided the only real light on what makes conservatives tick in an article I read a couple of years ago.

    Now he is expounding an obvious truth:



    But Americans need to understand the threat before they can react to it. And then they need to react to it in positive, not negative, ways.
    Jonathan Haidt is also the one says liberals like you are intolerant of other ideas because they just can't fathom them.

  5. #425
    Original Ranter
    Points: 145,567, Level: 91
    Level completed: 70%, Points required for next Level: 1,083
    Overall activity: 66.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Unenlightened
    Karma
    26080
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    42,501
    Points
    145,567
    Level
    91
    Thanks Given
    5,743
    Thanked 7,530x in 5,950 Posts
    Mentioned
    298 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    306
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    This guy, Jonathan Haidt, is one of the best social researchers and commentators I have seen. He provided the only real light on what makes conservatives tick in an article I read a couple of years ago.

    Now he is expounding an obvious truth:



    But Americans need to understand the threat before they can react to it. And then they need to react to it in positive, not negative, ways.
    This has what to do with conservatives?
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  6. #426
    Points: 13,028, Level: 27
    Level completed: 43%, Points required for next Level: 522
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    13,028
    Level
    27
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Jonathan Haidt is also the one says liberals like you are intolerant of other ideas because they just can't fathom them.
    Rubbish. He just says liberals and conservatives are different in their moral precepts.
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

  7. #427
    Points: 174,129, Level: 99
    Level completed: 12%, Points required for next Level: 3,521
    Overall activity: 81.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive1 year registered50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    25162
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    51,699
    Points
    174,129
    Level
    99
    Thanks Given
    3,722
    Thanked 9,378x in 7,335 Posts
    Mentioned
    499 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    Rubbish. He just says liberals and conservatives are different in their moral precepts.
    University of Virginia Professor Jonathan Haidt’s new book The Righteous Mind doesn’t simply suggest that conservatives may not be as close-minded as they are portrayed. It proves that the opposite is the case, that conservatives understand their ideological opposite numbers far better than do liberals.

    Haidt’s research asks individuals to answer questionnaires regarding their core moral beliefs—what sorts of values they consider sacred, which they would compromise on, and how much it would take to get them to make those compromises. By themselves, these exercises are interesting....

    But Haidt’s research went one step further, asking self-indentified conservatives to answer those questionnaires as if they were liberals and for liberals to do the opposite. What Haidt found is that conservatives understand liberals’ moral values better than liberals understand where conservatives are coming from. Worse yet, liberals don’t know what they don’t know; they don’t understand how limited their knowledge of conservative values is. If anyone is close-minded here it’s not conservatives.

    Haidt has a theory regarding why this is the case, based on the idea that conservatives speak a broader and more encompassing language of six moral values while liberals embrace three of the six in a narrow set of core values....
    @ Liberals or Conservatives: Who’s Really Close-Minded?

    The difference is liberals' narrower embrace of moral values, they're closed-minded to those they can't comprehend, and are unaware of this.

  8. #428
    Points: 174,129, Level: 99
    Level completed: 12%, Points required for next Level: 3,521
    Overall activity: 81.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive1 year registered50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    25162
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    51,699
    Points
    174,129
    Level
    99
    Thanks Given
    3,722
    Thanked 9,378x in 7,335 Posts
    Mentioned
    499 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    305
    Rubbish? Here's Haidt in his own words:
    Crossing the Divide

    The two narratives are as opposed as they could be. Can partisans even understand the story told by the other side? The obstacles to empathy are not symmetrical. There is no foundation used by the left that is not also used by the right. Even though conservatives score slightly lower on measures of empathy and may therefore be less moved by a story about suffering and oppression, they can still recognize that it is awful to be kept in chains. And even though many conservatives opposed some of the great liberations of the 20th century—of women, sweatshop workers, African Americans, and gay people—they have applauded others, such as the liberation of Eastern Europe from communist oppression.

    But when liberals try to understand the Reagan narrative, they have a harder time. When I speak to liberal audiences about the three “binding” foundations—loyalty, authority, and sanctity—I find that many in the audience don’t just fail to resonate; they actively reject these concerns as immoral. Loyalty to a group shrinks the moral circle; it is the basis of racism and exclusion, they say. Authority is oppression. Sanctity is religious mumbo-jumbo whose only function is to suppress female sexuality and justify homophobia.

    In a study I conducted with colleagues Jesse Graham and Brian Nosek, we tested how well liberals and con*servatives could understand each other. We asked more than 2,000 American visitors to fill out the Moral Foundations Questionnaire. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out normally, answering as themselves. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out as they think a “typical liberal” would respond. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out as a “typical conservative” would respond. This design allowed us to examine the stereotypes that each side held about the other. More important, it allowed us to assess how accurate they were by comparing people’s expectations about “typical” partisans to the actual responses from partisans on the left and the right. Who was best able to pretend to be the other?

    The results were clear and consistent. Moderates and conservatives were most accurate in their predictions, whether they were pretending to be liberals or conservatives. Liberals were the least accurate, especially those who described themselves as “very liberal.” The biggest errors in the whole study came when liberals answered the care and fairness questions while pretending to be conservatives. When faced with statements such as “one of the worst things a person could do is hurt a defenseless animal” or “justice is the most important requirement for a society,” liberals assumed that conservatives would disagree. If you have a moral matrix built primarily on intuitions about care and fairness (as equality), and you listen to the Reagan narrative, what else could you think? Reagan seems completely unconcerned about the welfare of drug addicts, poor people, and gay people. He is more interested in fighting wars and telling people how to run their sex lives.
    @ Born This Way? Nature, nurture, narratives, and the making of our political personalities

  9. #429
    Points: 13,028, Level: 27
    Level completed: 43%, Points required for next Level: 522
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Social10000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Awryly's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    976
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    12,000 merciful miles from the US
    Posts
    3,031
    Points
    13,028
    Level
    27
    Thanks Given
    74
    Thanked 146x in 132 Posts
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    @ Liberals or Conservatives: Who’s Really Close-Minded?

    The difference is liberals' narrower embrace of moral values, they're closed-minded to those they can't comprehend, and are unaware of this.

    Haidt's 6 "moral values" are, of course, the constructs of someone with a conservative bent. Though that does not lessen my admiration for his work in explaining how conservatives think.

    A liberal proponent would no doubt construct a different set of values. Which conservatives would no doubt not understand either.

    The American Enterprise Institute (a conservative think tank) endorsement of Haidt's leanings acknowledges the partisanship Haidt pretends to avoid.
    Last edited by Awryly; 11-07-2012 at 07:29 PM.
    Come sit down beside me I said to myself
    And although it doesn't make sense
    I held my own hand as a small sign of trust
    And together I sat on the fence


    Anon. Very anon.

  10. #430
    Points: 174,129, Level: 99
    Level completed: 12%, Points required for next Level: 3,521
    Overall activity: 81.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive1 year registered50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    25162
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    51,699
    Points
    174,129
    Level
    99
    Thanks Given
    3,722
    Thanked 9,378x in 7,335 Posts
    Mentioned
    499 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by Awryly View Post
    Haidt's 6 "moral values" are, of course, the constructs of someone with a conservative bent. Though that does not lessen my admiration for his work in explaining how conservatives think.

    A liberal proponent would no doubt construct a different set of values. Which conservatives would no doubt not understand either.
    That is simply not what Haidt has found, namely that of six moral values, the three moral values liberals hold to overlap the six conservatives hold to, iow, they share three, but liberals lack three more, and that is why they fail to comprehend what conservatives say and are intolerant.

    You defended Haidt: "This guy, Jonathan Haidt, is one of the best social researchers and commentators I have seen." I'm just showing you what he actually says.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Forum Topsite Critical Acclaim
Top Ron Paul Sites - Ranking the best Ron Paul related Freedom and Liberty Websites
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO