Description
there are two questions. Only one questions has to be chosen and then write an essay about it. I mean writing an essay about either 1 or 2
- In what ways does Jonathan Haidt in the Righteous Mind agree with Hume’sand Glaucon’s positions and in what ways does he disagree with them? For each case, explain some of the main research he uses to support his views. Are these positions convincing? Or could his research or findings be challenged? If so, how?
- In the Righteous Mind Jonathan Haidt argues against the idea that rationality is the main attribute we use when we make moral judgements. This is part of what he calls the rationalist delusion. However, the fact that the first impulse for making a moral judgement comes from the emotions does not mean the judgement is correct. (In other words, the fact that the elephant immediately leans to one side (or another) of a moral dilemma does not mean that side is correct. Haidt recognizes the importance of exploratory over confirmatory thought and of some individuals challenging the reasoning of others to arrive at truths (or to produce good public policy). Could this mean that reason still is what must justify what is moral? What could Kantians say to support the view that morality comes from reason and what could they say to Haidt claims that Hume is correct?
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Explanation & Answer
Hey buddy,I'm done with your assignment. You can complete the payment now. It was a pleasure working with you. I hope you will invite me for future assignments. Good luck and be safe buddy.
Running Head: JONATHAN HEIDT ON REASONING
Title
Name of Student
Institution Affiliation
Course
1
JONATHAN HEIDT ON REASONING
2
Ethical principles are used to provide a society with a system of laws that its subjects
abide by. According to Jonathan Heidt, the writer of the acclaimed book, the righteous mind, the
end goals of the pursuit of such principles should be to provide an unbiased scale between harm
and justice. In this book, he argues that rationality should not be the main driving force behind
moral judgment (Klasios, 2012). He calls this type of thinking the rationalist delusion, where an
individual looks to reason his or her way out on his sense of what is right and what is wrong.
Jonathan presents his arguments to counter the use of reason as the moral compass to distinguish
between good and bad. However, he holds the belief that it imperative that innate reasonings on
moral concepts be challenged to explore and come to the real truth. The discovery of such truth,
he believes, will provide the correct basis for making a good judgment. On the first view,
Jonathan's thoughts seem contradictory as he both criticizes and supports reasoning. Therefore,
the purpose of this essay will be to provide a clear understanding of how his thoughts on
reasoning can be interpreted to provide a sensible conclusion. Also, there will be an assessment
of the Heidt’s ideology from a Kantian perspective, to validate the claim made by Heidt that
David Hume is correct.
A major aspect of Heidt's argument is that of delusion that comes from rationalist
t...