Moral Outrage: A Theory on Why We’re Seeing So Much of It
I've been saying this for quite a while now...so I'm not crazy or morally outraged. What we've been seeing with the left, the academics, the protesters, is an attempt to draw attention to others when they themselves are guilty. The difference is, these groups are not aware of their own behavior but somewhere deep deep inside, (you've got to go really really deep), they act out instinctively.
What's really disturbing about these groups is we're paying them to do so, money right out of your back pocket through taxes, donations and investments.
There is something to be said about Conscious Self inspection; but for the acts of government, politics, and destruction of your property, at our expense, we are justified to be outraged because we expected better of them.
So much for the separation of morality, ethics, accountability and state.
What's really disturbing about these groups is we're paying them to do so, money right out of your back pocket through taxes, donations and investments.
There is something to be said about Conscious Self inspection; but for the acts of government, politics, and destruction of your property, at our expense, we are justified to be outraged because we expected better of them.
So much for the separation of morality, ethics, accountability and state.
Case in point, Dinesh came to America to be an American and he learned not just our constitution but our history as well...There is no better American that the ones that Want to be and can appreciate and live the dream.
This is not special to one group or to any individual. It is how people work internally. The authors were only attracted by a recent mass mediated expression of it. So, as psychologists, they studied it.
And it is not new with them. They began this work at least five years ago with other colleagues.
Zachary Rothschild here:
https://www.bowdoin.edu/faculty/z/zro...
Lucas Keefer here:
https://www.usm.edu/psychology/facult...
(I am morally outraged because you do not do your homework.)
Thanks for the links.
As far as hiltery or any of these creatures is that number 1...she was on our payroll and we have every right to bitch. Number 2, she truly is an unconscious idiot that clearly has no mutuality with us, never mind existence itself.
She and her ilk are some kind of universal retards...I'd sooner trust a snake...
You are engaging in right now when you condemn Democrats and Hillary Clinton. You re-establish your own moral superiority.
Also, see their fifth test; " Study 5 showed that guilt-driven outrage was attenuated by an affirmation of moral identity in an unrelated context." When you socialize here with friends over music, for instance, you diminish your moral outrage against the Democrats and the former First Lady. You do socialize here about music, don't you?
(1) Accuse the victim of the crime. (2) Use the victim's stunned silence and open-jawed disbelief as admission of guilt. (3) Walk away, puffed up in false pride, to the cheers of the crowd.
Denial of responsibility. (They made me do it. This was retaliation, not aggression.)
Denial of injury. (Nothing much was harmed, no one was much hurt.)
Denial of the victim. (They deserved it.)
Condemnation of the condemners. (You are worse than us.)
Appeal to higher loyalties. (Greater good, higher purpose, higher moral law, deeper commitments.)
As you can see, it applies to the Civil Rights movement as well as to Galt's Strike. The techniques are morally neutral. It is just how people think (maybe just WEIRD people - see above https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post... ).
Maybe they need a good spanking but I am afraid that they'd probably enjoy it...so it would only reinforce that behavior.
I should have read this more carefully before my other ramblings.
Yes, they deserve the restrictions as well as protections that are correctly imposed on the immature.
Look at the screamers.
Permissible as, according to academics, they are alleviating past guilt?
Are they expressing anguish over past guilt, or are they showing childish solidarity with fellow empty heads?
Libertarian conservative political scientist forced by a baying mob of students to abandon the stage in mid-lecture.
Charles Murray, author of The Bell Curve, which examined possible links between race and intelligence, had to flee Middlebury College in Vermont with the assistance of security guards.
The prof who invited had her arm broken.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/and...
http://hotair.com/archives/2017/03/03...
etc.
Hits the nail right on the head. BT
Truthfully, I have nothing but an extended Bow finger to show them.
I heard it said that Mankind, being Mammals and having natures instincts are and should be better than mere animals. What you have demonstrated is that the Left are no better than animals and surely relates to my observation that they are not conscious beings in the same sense as we are. I can see in my work that many that have been victimized do have the ability, once aware, to gain introspection and create value. I have witnessed some stunning awakenings in the Neothink Society as did our Forefathers; But, as for some of the most vial on the left...there is no hope.
But, I digress...what's in a name?
1) that there are people who express moral outrage,
2) that these same people have committed actions, or have held thoughts, which they now regret, and now want to expunge by the public expression of moral outrage.
To make the case, it would be necessary to define 'moral' and identify those who belong to groups 1) and 2) and show that these groups are the same people. In such studies, confirmation bias is the rule. 'Seek and you shall find'.
Perhaps the source paper reports on this effort.
In the intellectualtakeout link no evidence of this is given.
Example questions were probably- did you ever do anything that you now consider as immoral?
Have you ever had an immoral thought?
Two people answer yes to at least one point.
Next question- More recently, have you ever expressed outrage at immorality?
A few people answer yes. So case proven. !
The summary concludes with:
'hopefully the research .. gets us closer to understanding why people are demonstrating so much outrage'.
I have given a simpler explanation - People like to join groups.
Perhaps this could be tested by identifying sociable people and seeing how many of them express moral outrage, and v.v.
As the same definitional and confirmation bias problems exists I predict the conclusion would be the same -
yes the proposition is correct.
Try, sociability -> entertainment industry-> much moral posturing.
A better policy- go for Occum's Razor, the simplest explanation,
better still- form no conclusion without evidence.
Another thought, most of the public moral outragers are young adults and teens.
So is that the age cohort more likely to have guilt over their past than older people?
Instead I postulate, that that is the age when attention seeking with peers is most prevalent.
We don't know the peramiters of the study and it cost's 40 bucks to find out...however, we can observe that the loudest of the loud, the least moral of the average and the most vial of the violent are in fact not aware of their own immorality.
And yes, not expressed in the brief, those that follow, just for jollies or those that are being paid to agitate with no conscience in doing so.
All this Trump and Russia stuff- it was Obama who told the ambassador he would have more leeway on negotiations after the election. the dems met with the russians a lot. Its a witch hunt for sure to get rid of Trump. What a waste.
Newsflash... Maybe Podesta should have had stronger password than the word "P@ssword".
Maybe some Bernie people were pretty pissed off at Hillary fixing the election and they just handed out the documents and the account login credentials. I find that dramatically more plausible than the Russians being afraid of a woman that is basically a walking policy vending machine. Put your half-million in and get what you want.
That seems to be Trump's weakness, and it could easily bring down his presidency if he doesn't let the professionals start managing his daily message. He could easily go into the midterms looking like as much of a nut-job as they are.
Fickle this bunch is...
I kind of chalk it to the Russian dominance of the oil markets. They need to strongly oppose to keep their Sierra Club wing happy.
Pun intended.
This explanation is unconvincing.
Rather, it is simply a wish (instinct?) to belong to a group.
Those who are loud in public will not join the calm reasoners, or the indifferent.
They are joining a bandwagon.
There is no need to investigate their past for moral failings, they are just weak minded.
What you said above is true, but it denies the importance of the study. Barbara Branden taught a class called "Efficient Thinking." I only know out-takes from it; I attended one lecture as a guest many decades ago. But identifying errors is part of the process of establishing good habits.
Another example in the same vein is "Cognitive Dissonance." Conservative bloggers have correctly identified it as a modality of left-wing thinking (or ahem "thinking"). It explains why protests against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan did not continue into the Obama administration. But the theory was developed, in part, on the basis of how people live with buying the wrong car.
For an example of applied good thinking, read "The WEIRDest People in the World" "
It is about a truly unusual group: people from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic
(WEIRD)1 societies. In particular, it is about the Western, and more specifically American, undergraduates who form the bulk of the database in the experimental branches of psychology, cognitive science, and economics, as well as allied fields (hereafter collectively labeled the “behavioral sciences”).
http://hci.ucsd.edu/102b/readings/Wei...
The authors of that study did not intend it, but in toto it does outline why we are materially successful relative to the great population of "everyone else." We have a peculiar way of looking at the world. Even our "natural" optical illusions are not common to other peoples.
One example from that relevant to Objectivism is that some other peoples, such as Russians and Saudi Arabians are willing to engage in "altruistic punishment" giving up a reward in order to make someone else suffer. That's not us... Is it?
That's my take anyway.
CISA Moves Forward: These 83 Senators Just Voted To Expand Surveillance
It's so basic, it's funny...
The Golden Rule is difficult to promote here when you have a group blaming others for the deeds and thoughts they themselves are guilty of...
As for the theory... This can also explain why anti-government conservatives, especially Christians, are morally outraged over Islamic terrorism.
Similarly, I find that Sykes and Matza's theory of "Techniques of Neutralization," which was developed from work with juvenile delinquents applies, to the civil rights movement, in particular, but to just about all anti-social behavior, including conservative extremism, "ethnic cleansing," and warfare between nations.
Pot... kettle... black...