You did a great job at looking at Haidt book from the EA perspective. I think trying to do the opposite is also interesting: how can EA be understood in the light of the moral foundations theory?
I’m in the introduction to EA program and yesterday we were talking about triage as part of reviewing the readings. Even though we bought the argumentation by MacAskill about triaging being the best thing to do and something we must not look away from it felt conflicting. In the framework of Haidt that’s easily explained as the sanctity/degradation foundation kicking in and making very difficult to compare the value of different lives.
Haidt says that each culture and group uses all the foundations but with different weights. I would bet that the foundations test performed in this community will show above average weights for some foundations (care/harm) and below average for some others (sanctity/degradation, authority/subversion).
You did a great job at looking at Haidt book from the EA perspective. I think trying to do the opposite is also interesting: how can EA be understood in the light of the moral foundations theory?
I’m in the introduction to EA program and yesterday we were talking about triage as part of reviewing the readings. Even though we bought the argumentation by MacAskill about triaging being the best thing to do and something we must not look away from it felt conflicting. In the framework of Haidt that’s easily explained as the sanctity/degradation foundation kicking in and making very difficult to compare the value of different lives.
Haidt says that each culture and group uses all the foundations but with different weights. I would bet that the foundations test performed in this community will show above average weights for some foundations (care/harm) and below average for some others (sanctity/degradation, authority/subversion).