The Moral Sentiments of Us - Jonathan Haidt 

How can this only have a few hundred views. JH really needs his own channel. One of the most interesting people out there currently and not nearly enough exposure.

I am surprised at my ignorance of something so self evident.

The problem is that which Jonathan Haidt alsy brings up, is that all the social sciences, sociologies, are all 100% lefft wing, so there's no room for a real discussion, just a clear agenda. Jonathan Haidt is truly greater though, cause he attepmpts to be more in the middle and understand other viewpoint. In today's times that on it's own is rare and special, while also he has incredible knowledge on his topic and all other topics.

Just how object perception understood in vision just dubbed the same thing to Morals, are we understand morals..

It seems to me that this trend started as early as the year 1000, when networks of commerce start to develop in Europe. It is the gradual erosion of the society and the emergence of the individual, and I think it is at the core of a lot of cultural movements that happened throughout the centuries.

Imagine if Gal Gadot had watched this video.

I must say i enjoy JH talks and sense he truly is attempting to understand the human dynamic as we evolve. He has the same problem as most psychologists. Humanity has two beginnings, the material and self awareness. These two areas of understanding do not mix. Within my own framework i must be able to live with myself, security, love and community. Materialism is my method of physical sustainability. The point where He describes what we should do, finding common ground may happen within the material sense, food clothing and shelter. But, and this is a big one, from a self awareness perspective, this can only be achieved over vast time and assimilation of values that continue prosperity. When we look at the chart showing countries prosperity we see that the self awareness ritual is different as cut across the chart. Each country and economy has had ample opportunity to join the prosperity matrix at some level. Why then are some still living in the mid evil period of darkness? The self awareness virtues are incomprehensibly different. I part company with JH in his understanding that some high level of values that man can create will settle these differences. He even admits this, unwittingly, with his cute pictures of the Big Bang in this video. Describing differences is one thing, but disconnecting from the human self awareness paradigm and managing the diversity is quite another.

It’s also interesting how this applies to the moral authoritarians on the left (the identity politics types).

Ends his talk on “we can do large scale liberal democracies, but there may be a small margin of error and we might be outside of the margin of error!” What!???

freakin shit ... found him by accident and also found out iam wrong with conservatives... im a total liberal but this guy is worth alot

The use of GDP per capital is a crude and inaccurate measure. This is why Marx and Dickens make perfect sense. Both were writing about the same time in the same locations looking at the life of working people. Marx from the perspective of the wealthy trust fund child of an industrialist who was taking advantage of the working class to enrich Daddy. Dickens from the perspective of the child growing up in less than ideal circumstances, saddled with a father who ended up in a work house and his own time in a workhouse. The measure of taking total productivity, the actual work by the working class not the entrepreneur and dividing it by the total population of the nation is not an accurate measure of the economy. It fails to tell you where that money is going, who holds the lion share of the money. Keep in mind that in our current system money and politics or economics and politics are like conjoined twins that share vital organs. Economic disparity equal political disparity. Sadly most people, including economists, fail to see that. The divides are not just because of economic disparity but also because those at the top, the small slice of the system with the smallest number of members but the highest amount of wealth and power work to undermine the vast majority. Very much like the monotheistic god who tells the people how to please him/her, is omniscient and so already knows the outcome, who punishes the people for the mistakes they make even though he/she knows all along that will be the outcome.

This is making arguments for causation for variables that have very little to do with each other.