A Review of The Righteous Mind
The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt strives to offer evidence for why people take different viewpoints on politics and religion. In a more broad sense, he looks at morality itself. By closely examining human behavior, Haidt provides the reader with self-gathered evidence to defend his reasoning behind the formation of morality.
Part One of The Righteous Mind is centered around the metaphor, “The mind is divided, like a rider on an elephant, and the rider’s job is to serve the elephant” (1). He begins by asking where morality comes from. The nativist view elects that morality it native to our minds, either on our “God-inscribed hearts, or in our evolved moral …show more content…
Here, Haidt provides two different takes on the formation of morality. Either morality evolved through natural selection as an adaptation at an individual and group level like Darwin believed or simultaneously on multiple levels. Haidt doesn’t pick his preferred view, but does state that the second option “would go a long way toward explaining why people are simultaneously so selfish and so groupish” (218). Next, Haidt introduces the “hive switch”. This is the idea that individuals are entirely selfish until we are able to temporarily escape and become something bigger (223). He provides three ways we are able to make this switch: through awe in nature, Durkheimogens, or raves (227-234). He quotes a veteran that said, “‘I’ passes insensibly into a ‘we,’ ‘my’ becomes ‘our,’ and individual fate loses its central importance” (222). In his next chapter, Haidt discusses religion. “We humans have an extraordinary ability to care about things beyond ourselves, to circle around those things with other people, and in the process to bind ourselves into teams that can pursue larger projects. That 's what that 's what religion is all about” (273). That’s what Haidt believes religion is---merely a “groupish” tendency. Lastly, Haidt concludes that people are wired to their viewpoints. Because of this, we so strongly cling to our beliefs that this has become the basis for friction …show more content…
Haidt identifies as an atheist, but does not force his view upon the reader. However, I strongly disagreed with this portion of the book. Haidt links all aspects of morality to evolution. Personally, I strongly disagree that humans evolved from cells, to organisms, to chimps. Haidt states humans broke the barrier when the genus homo emerged (208). Life continued to advance until it finally arrived at what we now know as “homo sapiens”. Science seems to take the humanity out of the human. Respect for human life at all stages is lessened. I feel that Haidt contributes to this as well. Humans are merely another species in existence, and he refers to humans as “selfish primates” (220). Which leads me to critique another one of his ideas: that humans are overall selfish, and rarely transcend this. I believe humans are very compassionate. There is great evidence to support this all around us. I will agree, we do have selfish tendencies, but we are more that those tendencies. I believe we were created by God to love, and countless people do just
The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt strives to offer evidence for why people take different viewpoints on politics and religion. In a more broad sense, he looks at morality itself. By closely examining human behavior, Haidt provides the reader with self-gathered evidence to defend his reasoning behind the formation of morality.
Part One of The Righteous Mind is centered around the metaphor, “The mind is divided, like a rider on an elephant, and the rider’s job is to serve the elephant” (1). He begins by asking where morality comes from. The nativist view elects that morality it native to our minds, either on our “God-inscribed hearts, or in our evolved moral …show more content…
Here, Haidt provides two different takes on the formation of morality. Either morality evolved through natural selection as an adaptation at an individual and group level like Darwin believed or simultaneously on multiple levels. Haidt doesn’t pick his preferred view, but does state that the second option “would go a long way toward explaining why people are simultaneously so selfish and so groupish” (218). Next, Haidt introduces the “hive switch”. This is the idea that individuals are entirely selfish until we are able to temporarily escape and become something bigger (223). He provides three ways we are able to make this switch: through awe in nature, Durkheimogens, or raves (227-234). He quotes a veteran that said, “‘I’ passes insensibly into a ‘we,’ ‘my’ becomes ‘our,’ and individual fate loses its central importance” (222). In his next chapter, Haidt discusses religion. “We humans have an extraordinary ability to care about things beyond ourselves, to circle around those things with other people, and in the process to bind ourselves into teams that can pursue larger projects. That 's what that 's what religion is all about” (273). That’s what Haidt believes religion is---merely a “groupish” tendency. Lastly, Haidt concludes that people are wired to their viewpoints. Because of this, we so strongly cling to our beliefs that this has become the basis for friction …show more content…
Haidt identifies as an atheist, but does not force his view upon the reader. However, I strongly disagreed with this portion of the book. Haidt links all aspects of morality to evolution. Personally, I strongly disagree that humans evolved from cells, to organisms, to chimps. Haidt states humans broke the barrier when the genus homo emerged (208). Life continued to advance until it finally arrived at what we now know as “homo sapiens”. Science seems to take the humanity out of the human. Respect for human life at all stages is lessened. I feel that Haidt contributes to this as well. Humans are merely another species in existence, and he refers to humans as “selfish primates” (220). Which leads me to critique another one of his ideas: that humans are overall selfish, and rarely transcend this. I believe humans are very compassionate. There is great evidence to support this all around us. I will agree, we do have selfish tendencies, but we are more that those tendencies. I believe we were created by God to love, and countless people do just