Academic-Capital

The book The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt moves into the psychology of political parties and political persuasion. People naturally accuse the other parties of not thinking clearly and following logic. Each views the other as duped! Yet in his work, he points out that since there are strong logical arguments that follow most parties, these rational choices are based on their intuition. The logic seems to follow as people find justification for their choices. This makes changing one’s ideological views very difficult for many people.  Jonathan Haidt, University of Virginia social psychologist, believes that people first have intuition and then rational choice. That rational choice is based upon people’s intuition and subject to it. He does not discuss those who can find multiple paths to rationality, understand the various arguments, and find validity in each of these arguments to think critically about ideology. It would require a level of stepping outside oneself withou

As a human species we develop our political views with those around us who help shape our experiences, motives and attitudes through approval, information, and advice (Levitan   & Visser, 2009). Openness to persuasion depends on those who are immediately around us. The majority of people use others to evaluate and define their own beliefs and opinions. When issues of morality come to the forefront of conscious people become more convinced of the rightness of their assumptions. Such people are less tolerant of those who disagree with them (Skitka et al, 2005) and become further beyond the influence of others outside their social networks. They double down on their convictions and begin to avoid those who disagree. This avoidance further puts them on a particular stream of consciousness that seeks out confirming information while ignoring dis confirming information. The more alienated a person becomes from those who disagree the more they lack critical thinking skills