What we’re about
In this Meetup, inspired by Jonathan Haidt and other authors who examine how humans think and act in cultural and political environments, we will try to better understand our own and others' values and beliefs - and possibly even find ways to improve dialogue across the usual political and cultural boundaries. This is NOT "Crossfire" or some other political debate program. This is not a college dorm-room discussion. This is not a book club. We use lectures, case studies, exercises, and group discussions to explore concepts and issues raised by social psychologist Jonathan Haidt in his works, including "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion." We also explore issues related to polarization discussed by other social psychologists, cognitive scientists, etc.
The objective is not so much to debate political issues, advance policy prescriptions or find areas of policy agreement (e.g., in health care or defense policy) as to explore – using exercises, case studies, lectures and group discussions – how we think and how we become so attached to particular values and beliefs that separate us into Blue, Red, and other Americans. Class participation and a strong interest in hearing and understanding other points of view will be crucial to our success. There are recommended (but not required) readings that allow members to get more out of the Meetups.
Hopefully we will learn something about ourselves and about those other Americans we often consider to be our opponents in political and cultural battles. And we'll have some fun, too!
SYLLABUS for our four central topics:
Topic 1
We begin by considering what it would be like to live in a society other than the WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic) world we enjoy here in the DMV (the District and nearby Maryland and Virginia).
We then explore the human inclination to join groups, become loyal to groups and the groups’ moral narratives, and then become blind to alternative moral worlds.
The attractions of authoritarianism as opposed to liberal democracy.
The epidemic of loneliness in much of the world.
Sorting ourselves out. Many of us don’t really want to live with diversity.
Plenty of class discussion as these points and examples are raised.
Topic 2
Through case studies of moral dilemmas, we examine our tendency to respond quickly with intuition, then use our reason to justify whatever decision our intuition has produced. The case studies also give us an opportunity to consider our moral values, utilitarianism versus other moral values, and our duties to society. Lots of class discussion about the case studies and the issues they raise.
We consider different approaches to creating a society in which unrelated people can live together peacefully – Mill v Durkheim, individualistic versus sociocentric – and the role of our righteous minds in creating human societies.
How to deal with the challenge of freeloaders?
Haidt’s moral matrices for Libertarians, Liberals and Conservatives.
Group discussions on each of these points.
Topic 3
We’ll discuss whether, as Jonathan Haidt, J. S. Mill, Bertrand Russell and others write, we should see a yin – yang relationship between liberals and conservatives: Do we need both for a healthy state of political life?
We’ll then examine the human mind and how it works. In particular –
Do we know as much as we think we do about the world and important political issues? Enough to justify the strong views we hold about some political issues? We’ll try some exercises to find out.
If not, how do we make our decisions on political issues? What role does our political tribe play in this?
Does it help to keep up with the news? Social media?
Do our senses and our mind give us a clear, objective view of the world out there?
Topic 4
We’ll continue to examine the human mind and how it affects our political reasoning and loyalties. Lots of discussions here.
Confirmation bias, groupthink, peer pressure, motivated reasoning, etc., etc.
Extreme partisanship may be literally addicting.
How good are our memories?
How well can we predict the future?
How will future generations look at the conventional wisdom and beliefs we hold today?
We’ll next consider and discuss Haidt’s views on the role of religion in creating and maintaining large human societies.
Finally, we will consider and discuss how we might move forward in our political relationships, taking into account what we’ve discussed.
Upcoming events (1)
See all- So, where do we go from here?Link visible for attendees
So, where do we go from here?
We just had a huge election, and a lot of people are reacting very strongly -- positively and negatively.
Join us Thursday, December 5, as we talk about the reactions and where we might go from here.
As you prepare for the meetup, you may want to consider:
In the election, about half the country voted red and about half voted blue for president. Those “other” people aren’t going anywhere. So how are we going to deal with them? What's the best approach going forward – for us personally and for our communities and the country?
To begin with, as a general matter – not talking just about politics – Stephen Covey recommends we concentrate on our circle of influence, not our circle of concern:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tD0aFZkFrFA
(5 minutes 19 seconds)Related to this is the idea that there is a space between a stimulus we receive and choosing how we will respond:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DDyBcejnog
(58 seconds)We may want to consider how this might apply to us in our political life.
Another thing: In “Political Tribes: Group Instinct and the Fate of Nations,” Amy Chua writes: “America is beginning to display destructive political dynamics much more typical of developing and non-Western countries: ethnonationalist movements; backlash by elites against the masses; popular backlash against both ‘the establishment’ and ‘outsider minorities’ viewed as disproportionately powerful; and, above all, the transformation of democracy into an engine of zero-sum political tribalism.”
In other words, where people in a nation do not have or have abandoned a strong, overarching collective identity and instead emphasize their subgroup identities, things can move in a very bad direction. Think the Middle East, the former Yugoslavia, Northern Ireland, Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda, Hindus and Muslims in South Asia, and any number of other societies that have descended into savagery. Oh, and the American Civil War.
What we do at an individual level, with people in our families, our schools, our workplaces, and the people with whom we engage in the community, contributes to what our families, schools, workplaces, and communities are, how they treat others, and how they contribute to – or detract from – the community and the society as a whole. And our actions add to the actions of others to create our society. For example, here’s one person who made a powerful impact on the people around him by taking responsibility for the energy in the space where he found himself:
https://www.elizabethgilbert.com/dear-ones-a-story-years-ago-i-was-on-the-midtown-cross-town-bus-in-nyc-in/Here's a small sample of books on how to engage with other people, particularly people who do not share our beliefs and loyalties:
David McRaney, “How Minds Change: The Surprising Science of Belief, Opinion, and Persuasion”
Peter Boghossian, James Lindsay, “How to Have Impossible Conversations: A Very Practical Guide”
Jonathan Haidt, in “The Righteous Mind,” highly recommends Dale Carnegie, “How to Win Friends and Influence People”: “Dale Carnegie was one of the greatest elephant-whisperers of all time. In his classic book How to Win Friends and Influence People, Carnegie repeatedly urged readers to avoid direct confrontations. Instead he advised people to ‘begin in a friendly way,’ to ‘smile,’ to ‘be a good listener,’ and to ‘never say ‘you’re wrong.’’ The persuader’s goal should be to convey respect, warmth, and an openness to dialogue before stating one’s own case.”
Mónica Guzmán, “I Never Thought of It That Way: How to Have Fearlessly Curious Conversations in Dangerously Divided Times”
Joe Keohane, “The Power of Strangers: The Benefits of Connecting and a Suspicious World”
Finally, consider two examples of people engaging with actual hate group members and changing their beliefs and loyalties:
Daryl Davis – article and 7-minute listen in npr:
https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-ku-klux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robesMegan Phelps-Roper –
TED talk – (15 minutes 17 seconds)
https://youtu.be/bVV2Zk88beYLooking forward to seeing you Thursday, December 5, as we dig into these stories and ideas and try to develop productive ways to move forward.
Bill
