Haidt is so clearly advocating FOR something here. He's got his own world view, based on a judgement that peace is better than war, and that democracy (and it's underlying moral precepts) and social cohesion are better than conflict. He's CLEARLY arguing for that, but framing it as "don't be for or against". I once heard him say he felt like he got "outside" of the left/right dictomy, but he hasn't gotten outside of advocacy, not at all. The thing for which he's advocating is important! Don't get me wrong. It's righteous. How can he not see that? It's bewildering to me.

Just starting to watch, but I wanted to say congratulations to the increase in the subscribers to the podcast, its taken a fair amount of perseverance on your part and greatly appreciated by myself and many others I hope. Thank you both Jonathan and Monica. Being able to discuss idea's is the only way to resolve our differences. Interesting as I didn't believe that there would be a red wave, the world still has many surprises for all of us. Peace

Thank you for this interview! Jon Haidt is a longtime hero of mine, and you folks at Braver Angels are just great, too. Keep on keepin' on, y'all. We need you.

I love Jonathan Haidt's work; he's greatly influenced my thinking in so many ways! Going off the podcast, I recommend getting Daryl Davis on here as a guest! 💯

Very educative discussion! Prof Haidt made a great presentation in a conference on academic freedom held in Stanford in November 2022.

Loved this one. The part about where "the lines" goes I think is very important. It's something you encoutner very frequently today.

Haidt is great. He needs more exposure. Happy to see this video.

Wise as always. If only ppl listen more to wisdom 😒

Love how you can question the questions as well as the answers. Stay curious. I’m increasingly skeptical of any discussion frame by left and right. It assumes even a wide vision as two dimensionally flat. Progress needs at least a 4 dimensional perspective. Include above, below, within and around as well as a lens through time. You are peeling off labels and bursting bubbles letting insight and wisdom seep through the cracks. Keep challenging assumptions and guide us to wonder-full visions.

More please.

@patrickbranigan4487

Жыл бұрын

This is a real mind opener. Thank you for hosting the speaker. I appreciate the perspective of people who have tried to get some distance from all of the red vs blue fray and can point us in a more humble and workable approach to restarting the dialogue which our country so badly needs. Thank you again. Patrice

All about the incentives!!!

Hello from the UK. On the hooliganism thing that Jonathan mentioned - is it still an issue? Occasionally I would say. I think nowadays it is a bigger problem in places like Italy and Russia. It has affected much of Europe. However it did start in Britain and the fact it is seen as a British thing shows what a stain it has been on our national reputation.

2 heroes.

This diagnosis of activism is very similar to one person's experience of the 70s. Uncertainty Rules. Life is a process not a destination, so this discussion is vital, when spread across the population. Know your Self, and to your own self be true. Nothing is new under the Sun, because change is eternally constant now. Being less stupid requires being less smart, open minded neutrality is hard work.

Empirical questions for Jonathan and Monica: 1. Do the extremists want to better understand the other side?If not, what is to be done about them? 2. If they (and also the non extremists who are suffering under the status quo) understood the other side, would they give up what they want done as far as the divisive issues (e.g. jobs, guns, immigrants, public schools, public vs private paying for medical procedures that have questionable value to their recipients, action on Climate)? 3. How do you propose to get from agreeing to disagree, to action that satisfies both sides? What if no compromise is possible? 4. Don't you think that just like scientists get to try things empirically, that both sides (and even people like us who are on neither and both sides) should be able to do that, not just have philosophical arguments?

8:30, James deMeo would disagree with you about that and give the examples of the Trobriand Islanders, the Muria, and the Pygmy. I suspect the Andaman Island people named Jarawa also, based on the documentary on them. They were non-violent, with the exception of a defensive military, according to DeMeo's Vimeo lecture on Saharasia that was $10 . Well, maybe not the Jarawa.

I think a lot of understanding doesn't have to come from firsthand experience/accounts. It suffices to read oppositional literature and watch oppositional videos, of which the left really doesn't do. It took forever to truly understand this, but being around too many sex positive spaces helped clear that up for me.

I am a huge fan of Haidt's work on moral foundations theory. It really opened my eyes. As for some of the content from this episode… Can you direct us to Haidt's data that supports his conclusion that "political activism makes girls unhappy?" Given that his red line is only stating things that are factual, he must have done / read peer-reviewed work to prove causation rather than correlation. Specifically, I am especially curious about how other possible factors must have been ruled out, such as: - whether social media exacerbates girls' bullying patterns more than boys' bullying patterns (social dynamics vs physical altercation). - whether anxiety is coming from "political action" versus upticks in misogynistic legislation or views of high-profile personalities that the "political action" is in response to (ie symptom vs cause). Given that "politics" is the term we use to describe the Venn diagram of where our values intersect with legislation / policy, for kids to not be political, it stands to reason they need to either (a) suppress their values or (b) have all news censored from their view. True? Or is there some other way to "make kids not be political." How does Haidt square his advocacy for kids to stop trying to make their voices heard with his revulsion of "coddling Americans minds?" It almost seems as though he doesn't want to hear opinions that are counter to his own? Even as we admit that their views are still forming (as all of ours should be) isn't the best way to develop our theories and viewpoints is to expose them to the world at large? It seems open-mindedness is more essential than suppression. I'm just over here trying to un-coddle my mind and am eager to learn the science behind the rhetoric. Cheers!🙂

@BMoore335

Жыл бұрын

To a large extent, in my view, we tend to categorize to make things easier and ignore the person in favor of the analysis. Haidt here is sharing his perspective and views which he seems to try to square with his priors and evidence. But really it’s not about making a case, but understanding or at least appreciating his perspective and person. The red line issue is difficult, because what about intolerable experiences? But what can we do or glean from our experiences that help with intolerable cases? Can we accept wounds without wounding? Heal wounds rather than cause them? Can we judge not? Can we forgive? Can we try something new? Even an honest no to these answers is a starting point, it’s own honesty that can create ripples.

@WhizzingFish12

4 ай бұрын

These are really interesting questions and I appreciate your desire to grow. I will start by giving my own background which of course frames my response. i am a 30-year educator who works with young people in the social sciences. Haidt is spot on but I would have explained it differently. Bluntly, young people shouldn't be political bc they dont have the maturity (definitionally, not an attack), wisdom, experience, etc to make good decisions in general. They are naturally black and white thinkers, ideolistic/utopian, and emotional. This makes them highly manipulable - the examples are legion throughout history: Lenin, Hitler, Mao, etc all went after the young to push thelr revolutions forward bc they were so susceptible to "mind viruses." Theyd provide a utopian vision and then point them at "the enemy." Its no different todaay - progressivism (which is NOT actually progressive) is overwhelmingly found among tbe young. They are ill-informed (most cannot even well-articulate their own side's argument and are completely ignorant of those of the other side) yet sure of their righteousness. A very scary combo that is a breeding ground for authoritarianism. In my classes when we discuss issues, I always require students to "steel man" both sides - to research and explain the best arguments for the left AND right. it is amazing how much they shift towards the center when they actually understand that the other side has legitimate viewpoints based on how they see the world. And yes, teenage girls are the "worst" in this regard - its actually the manifestation of toxic feminity where the caring ethos goes way overboard. And yes, social media is a primary driver because it is so simplistic, viral, and geared towards negative emotions. Girls are the major consumers and it is the perfect weapon for female aggression (and females are just as aggressive as men, its just expressed relationally instead of physically). There absolutely should be age restrictions in its use - Id say 18 in a perfect world, but 16 minimum.

30:50

11 scholarships for women for every 1 for men and 20 different grants programs and womens poilcy in government agsint men been like this ever cents 1984

The guy has his flaws, obviously, but who is doing better and more important work as a public intellectual today? Can’t think of anyone

@danhiebert9478

Жыл бұрын

Jordan Peterson

@mark4asp

Жыл бұрын

I don't think Haidt is doing "important work as a public intellectual". He does not engage. Some of his presentations have comments switched off. That's anti-intellectual.

@WhizzingFish12

4 ай бұрын

Id say Jordan Peterson when at his best. Hes fantastic for young people in todays world, and its a terrible shame that he has been so demonized. For black Americans, Id say Thomas Sowell or Coleman Hughes.

It's not the technology, it's the use to maximize profit at any cost. There is nothing inherently wrong with the technology. He needs a critique of the destructive side to profit maximizing markets.

I think there might be a both-sides-ism problem here. This is phenomenon of drawing red lines, where some people-a lot of people-are considered beyond the pale and should not be talked to, does it really happen to a similar extent on both sides? I feel like I've seen it much more frequently from one side, the left. It stands out because ... it's actually kind of hard to understand what the logic behind it is. If you've got ideas that you think are right and can be convincing (you were convinced by them), wouldn't want the opportunity to tell them to someone else, since they might find them convincing as well?

@ryeisenman

Жыл бұрын

In christianity, there's the idea of "love your enemy". So where would the "red line" possibly be for a Christian. I suggest its possible to explain the professed christian Kanye West: he both declares he hates jews and also that he loves jews (to some, Kanye is only explicable by "mental illness". ) But I suggest this sort of conflicted dialogue, not specifically about "the jews", but about any collective identity, is inescapable. Similarly on the individual level: is Hitler outside some "red line" of christian love? (perhaps on Lex Fridman was discussed that the best way to love Hitler was to kill him). Solzhenitsyn: line between good and evil runs through human heart.

@avengemybreath3084

Жыл бұрын

Someone can do bad things, and even be against democracy, without being an “actual fascist.”

Trippy drugs are, at best, Allopathic medicine. Knowledgeable external guidance is required to prevent overdose, ..find a reasonable and rational healthy objective. Eliminating Nocebos, most of which are empty false labelling, is a tactical process to maintain personal metastability.

This Haidt guy seems decent enough, but the real John is John Wood, Jr. :P

What is feasible is to stop virtue signaling and see what really happens around you.

Lets have him back on now that the Repubs "swept to victory"...😏 Can we get a person who leans conservative next on here who can spend the hour picking apart the tropes of the Right next? Maybe just once...BA?

The older I get the more I think the problem is that we forgot the old saying..... Spare the rod and spoil the child.

I can appreciate Haidts point of view on most of what he says but I take issue with the generalization that Republicans are just bad. That’s a very generalist thing to say that wraps 85 million people in a lump of dung! I know he can do better. I am a Republican and my desire is to establish a balance in politics instead of finger pointing and attack. We Republicans for the most part just want our Republic to be restored or maintained where a mutual respect for all people is the norm. We see how far into the gutter leftist politics has pushed our government and see and fear the destructive consequence of the direction we are headed.

@jr.6199

Жыл бұрын

Others, making broad generalizations is your concern?

Whilst he has some interesting points of view, he is way off on quite a lot. Perhaps he should consider sport commentary as well..

With all due respect, I don't think the republican party is the worse party... I actually believe the democrat party is much much worse.

@tha1ne

Жыл бұрын

@DoubtingThomas yeah i disagree, the coup was a heat of the moment crowd rush that ended up occupying the white house for a hot sec. Meanwhile, the Democrats literally ran cover for the BLM riots which killed people, saw the destruction of billions of dollars in property, and lionized criminals throughout the country. The GOP has not done anything even close to that. Sorry.

@tha1ne

Жыл бұрын

@DoubtingThomas if you can’t even see that a riot where people actually died and millions of livelihoods destroyed is far worse, then there is no hope for you (by the way, what you say about it not being true is not true, I literally saw the media and plenty of democratic figureheads endorsing the riots lmao)

@tha1ne

Жыл бұрын

@DoubtingThomas LOL thanks for making my point for me. How many people died during the "coup" again compared to the riots? And yes, millions of people's livelihoods were ruined, just cause you dont like that fact doesnt make it untrue. The riots tried to upend society through violence, backed by the democrat party, it's clear this is much worse. Also you are simply wrong, the democrats not only endorsed the riots and even the violent property damage, they were bailing rioters out of jail. There are violent extremist elements of the BLM hashtag, who are endorsed by your so-called sensible people who are in the end not that sensible lol

@tha1ne

Жыл бұрын

@DoubtingThomas apparently if you post a link, then the comment doesn't post. Look up maxine waters comments about letting trump supporters know "theyre not welcome anywhere", ayanna presley saying there ought to be "unrest in the streets", kamala harris encouraging people to donate to groups bailing rioters out of jail, etc. The list goes on and on, too easy. Here's my challenge, name one riot caused by republicans that was nearly as destructive in property damage or lives lost. I'll wait lmao

@tha1ne

Жыл бұрын

@DoubtingThomas you keep mentioning some were shot by cops as if that makes things ANY better LOL. Of course you can measure evil by immediate deaths, saying otherwise is just trying to sugarcoat murder. Upending society through destruction, looting, and straight up murdering is far worse than a few people running into the capitol for a few min, and a few of those SAME people dying in the process. No one with a brain seriously thinks this was a real threat to democracy, unlike the ACTUAL destruction, murder, and violence of numerous cities across the country from the violence democrats encouraged. Boom roasted.

I have always liked Haidt, and he always admits to being left of center. But this interview clearly shows how far to the left he is politically. Nevertheless, I appreciate his passionate mission to fight illiberalism. A common cause, as it were, with many on the right, who do, in general, remain more classically liberal than those on the thoroughly transformed left. I have little to no actual affinity with today's Republican Party, but if "structural stupidity" necessarily means you're getting everything wrong (as Haidt claims here), then the Democratic Party is irretrievably broken, and a less "structurally stupid" GOP might well be the only viable option left. Haidt disputes this, arguing that Republicans are deeply involved in "subverting democratic institutions,'" quite a bogus insight that could only come from Haidt's still being in a bubble of sorts...his own personal cage of "structural stupidity."

@jazzfan7491

Жыл бұрын

Your view was just judged seditious conspiracy by a jury. Enjoy. 🤓

@hustler3of4culture3

Жыл бұрын

This is me trying to not be "in a bubble": how is gerrymandering and making a state house in, say, Wisconsin, go 70% Republican when 60% of state votes went to Democrats, not UNdemocratic? How is that NOT Republicans, who drew the districts, subverting democratic institutions.

@jazzfan7491

Жыл бұрын

@@hustler3of4culture3 Great point. Many states are like that, with a very heavy affirmative action bias for rural people. Do they complain about the affirmative action in the Senate and electoral college? Crickets...

@ericcarlson9885

Жыл бұрын

@@hustler3of4culture3 Oh, come on! Yes, it's technically undemocratic. But both sides CONSTANTLY gerrymander! Until gerrymandering is scuttled by the courts, both parties will use whatever means are at their disposal. Are you seriously trying to tell me that Democrats don't take what they can get, be it democratic or undemocratic? Good grief! They don't give a crap! It's legal for the moment; let's use it. (OR: It's blatantly illegal, but no one is going to catch us doing it; let's use it. Both sides are thoroughly corrupt. They hide it under a blanket of "let's at least make this LOOK civilized." But all in all, they're barely better than the third world. If you actually want to live under a true democracy in this day and age, you're kind of out of luck. I simply hold that the Republicans are slightly less nasty and tyrannical. They could hardly be more. The Democrats have pretty much reached the deepest of depths possible. (And personally, I'm left of center. I have no love for the GOP.)

@hustler3of4culture3

Жыл бұрын

@@ericcarlson9885 I didn't tell you that Democrats don't do it too. But I don't think you'll find that there are more republican votes statewide in States where they do do it.

Disappointed in JH. Have followed and read J Haidt for years with great respect. I agree with many points, especially the need for nuclear as a bridge to decarbonization. But, the punching down on young activists and females on the left, is concerning. He makes good points that extremism, negativity, victimhood is not good for mental health. Sure isn't. Neither is this continuing minimization of the seriousness of the climate crisis. Given the difficulty of achieving meaningful climate policy, due to human denial and the need for capital, the FACT is , we are not on track to avoid hitting the tipping points in the climate crisis. We are on track to exceed 1.5 degrees and melt the permafrost and unleash disastrous amounts of methane and foreign and ancient bacteria and viruses-that will do who knows what to humans. Maybe worse than Covid. I think young people are the ones who will suffer and SHOULD be activists. Their future is being ignored. Adults are into short term gain. MONEY and it's ok to trash the planet. JH is wrong on that point, IMHO.

@avengemybreath3084

Жыл бұрын

I didn’t hear him “punching” at anyone. It is apparently unhealthy, and certainlyunproductive, for children to imagine they know enough to be strident political activists. It’s hard enough after decades of experience and thinking to know for sure what is happening to anything complex, let alone to have any sense of certainty what should be done about it. As JH points out, many reforms, if not most, actually backfire or do more harm than good by creating other unanticipated problems. I’m not sure if you listened to the whole thing, but if not I would recommend a close listen. Warm regards to you, and best of luck.