# Is there still good and bad? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 22, 2023, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513 "2023-09-22T00:31:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![raspberry\_hunter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@raspberry\_hunter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raspberry_hunter)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/41 "2023-10-02T19:03:18Z")
> [@Babale](#): > > Haidt is arguing that because most people would be offput by a man having sex with a chicken despite nobody being harmed and no unfairness being created, this is evidence that there is a real and valuable thing called “sanctity” or “purity” that should not be ignored. Huh, again take this with a grain of salt because it’s been so long since I read it, but my reading was not that there is a “real” thing called purity (whatever that means) but that human beings will tend to construct something called “purity” or “sanctity” that is important to us, and that this is a part of psychology that we can’t discount even if rationally there’s no reason for it. Basically, I agree very much with your #2 and I think Haidt would too, but I think he would say that people DO tend to make “sanctity” constructs out of societally preconceived notions and so therefore this is going to be a societal thing that governs people’s reactions whether it makes rational sense or not. (I also agree with your #1, but I would also agree with Haidt that it’s not generally speaking the underlying reason why a person might react with visceral disgust to the idea. For someone like me, I might react with visceral disgust, then think through that and decide okay, maybe my societal preconceptions aren’t a good reason after all, and then think of #1 as a reason why it makes sense to object to it.) ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/42 "2023-10-02T19:42:49Z")
> [@raspberry\_hunter](#): > > Basically, I agree very much with your #2 and I think Haidt would too, but I think he would say that people DO tend to make “sanctity” constructs out of societally preconceived notions and so therefore this is going to be a societal thing that governs people’s reactions whether it makes rational sense or not. People also tend to make in-groups and out-groups, but I wouldn’t recommend that modern societies designate an out-group to channel their hatered towards. Sanctity and purity in and of themselves are nonsense concepts. They should be discarded, along with superstition and tribalism, on the ash-heap of history. > [@raspberry\_hunter](#): > > I also agree with your #1, but I would also agree with Haidt that it’s not generally speaking the underlying reason why a person might react with visceral disgust to the idea. For someone like me, I might react with visceral disgust, then think through that and decide okay, maybe my societal preconceptions aren’t a good reason after all, and then think of #1 as a reason why it makes sense to object to it Like I said, I agee with Haidt’s description of how people work. I just think the conclusion shouldn’t be “therefore we need to accept that people are hardwired to be concerned with purity”. We need to understand that these are arbitrary concepts that perhaps had purpose in a pre-rational society (in the sense that many harmful things are also taboo; but many other things are taboo because they harm not people but the social structure that placed certain elites on top) but are now obsolete. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/43 "2023-10-02T20:16:14Z")
That’s it exactly. These notions of “purity” and “sanctity” and such are quite real. Amongst conservatives. Folks of a liberal personality tend to answer as above with “Yawn. How primitive. We are, or should be, beyond that nonsense by now.” When Haidt got done with his book he basically said “Conservatives have balanced personalities that contain all these vital needs from a laundry list of traits. While liberals care mostly about fairness and largely ignore most of those other traits. And I, Haidt, think those other things are very important, so that’s the right way for a person and a society to be organized”. He said the last sentence fairly softly in that book. Yes, I too found his discoveries and data and explanations perceptive and informative. Conclusions, not so much. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/44 "2023-10-02T20:59:39Z")
> [@raspberry\_hunter](#): > > I… did not get that conclusion at all from that book. Though I did get the impression that Haidt had more sympathy with the liberal viewpoint and was therefore trying to bend over backwards not to demonize conservatives. Yes, this agrees with my impression. I certainly didn’t get the impression that Haidt believes that conservatives are better humans, inherently or otherwise. But he does think that liberals have certain blind spots. (He talks about a study he did with other researchers in which conservatives understood liberals’ moral point of view better than liberals understood conservatives’.) ---
**Author:** ![raspberry\_hunter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@raspberry\_hunter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raspberry_hunter)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/45 "2023-10-02T21:15:37Z")
Heh, while I may not disagree with you about sanctity (I’m not sure whether I do or not – I have to think about that a bit), I actually think pretty strongly that tribalism, when it can be directed into the in-group and not against hatred to the out-group _and_ when the in-group is sufficiently inviting but with boundaries (both of which I admit can be super hard but can be done with concerted effort; I’ve been part of such an effort before), is _super_ important for human beings, and when one tries to deny that, one gets into trouble. Human beings tend to need to form tribal groups, whether that’s religion, bowling groups, parent groups, online groups such as the Straight Dope (we’re about fighting ignorance! Yeah, go us!), music groups, what have you. Hence the books like _Bowling Alone_ and so on. I really don’t think you can disassociate tribalism from the human psyche. ---
**Author:** ![raspberry\_hunter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@raspberry\_hunter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raspberry_hunter)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/46 "2023-10-02T21:21:54Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > When Haidt got done with his book he basically said “Conservatives have balanced personalities that contain all these vital needs from a laundry list of traits. While liberals care mostly about fairness and largely ignore most of those other traits. And I, Haidt, think those other things are very important, so that’s the right way for a person and a society to be organized”. He said the last sentence fairly softly in that book. Wow, I really don’t remember that. I’ll have to look that up. What I remember him saying is something more like, “Conservatives pull from this laundry list of traits, while liberals prioritize fairness over the other traits. And I, Haidt, think that both sides either a) assume that the other side prioritizes exactly the same things they do, or b) think that what the other side prioritizes is stupid. I lean liberal, but I don’t want to write off half my fellow citizens, so I am going to try _really really hard_ not to say that what conservatives prioritize is stupid.” But anyway, I’ll have to check it out again and reread the conclusion. ---
**Author:** ![Babale](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/babale/32/15666_2.png) [@Babale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Babale)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/47 "2023-10-02T21:23:42Z")
I would love to dive into dual topics of whether tribalism and sanctity have their place in our future or not. My own thoughts on the matter could use fleshing out. Each of those is probably its own thread, though. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/48 "2023-10-02T21:26:37Z")
> [@raspberry\_hunter](#): > > Hence the books like _Bowling Alone_ and so on. I really don’t think you can disassociate tribalism from the human psyche. Yes, and Haidt specifically references _Bowling Alone_ and its notion of social capital, and relates that to what he calles “moral capital.” > [@](#): > > Everyone loves social capital. Whether you’re left, right, or center, who could fail to see the value of being able to trust and rely upon others? But now let’s broaden our focus beyond firms trying to produce goods and let’s think about a school, a commune, a corporation, or even a whole nation that wants to improve moral behavior. Let’s set aside problems of moral diversity and just specify the goal as increasing the “output” of prosocial behaviors and decreasing the “output” of antisocial behaviors, however the group defines those terms. To achieve almost any moral vision, you’d probably want high levels of social capital. (It’s hard to imagine how anomie and distrust could be beneficial.) But will linking people together into healthy, trusting relationships be enough to improve the ethical profile of the group? > > If you believe that people are inherently good, and that they flourish when constraints and divisions are removed, then yes, that may be sufficient. But conservatives generally take a very different view of human nature. They believe that people need external structures or constraints in order to behave well, cooperate, and thrive. These external constraints include laws, institutions, customs, traditions, nations, and religions. People who hold this “constrained” view are therefore very concerned about the health and integrity of these “outside-the-mind” coordination devices. Without them, they believe, people will begin to cheat and behave selfishly. Without them, social capital will rapidly decay. > > Haidt, Jonathan. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion (pp. 291-292). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. > [@](#): > > Let me state clearly that moral capital is not always an unalloyed good. Moral capital leads automatically to the suppression of free riders, but it does not lead automatically to other forms of fairness such as equality of opportunity. And while high moral capital helps a community to function efficiently, the community can use that efficiency to inflict harm on other communities. High moral capital can be obtained within a cult or a fascist nation, as long as most people truly accept the prevailing moral matrix. > > Nonetheless, if you are trying to change an organization or a society and you do not consider the effects of your changes on moral capital, you’re asking for trouble. This, I believe, is _the fundamental blind spot of the left_. It explains why liberal reforms so often backfire, and why communist revolutions usually end up in despotism. It is the reason I believe that liberalism—which has done so much to bring about freedom and equal opportunity—is not sufficient as a governing philosophy. It tends to overreach, change too many things too quickly, and reduce the stock of moral capital inadvertently. Conversely, while conservatives do a better job of preserving moral capital, they often fail to notice certain classes of victims, fail to limit the predations of certain powerful interests, and fail to see the need to change or update institutions as times change. > > Haidt, Jonathan. The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion (pp. 293-294). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition. ---
**Author:** ![raspberry\_hunter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@raspberry\_hunter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raspberry_hunter)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2023, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/49 "2023-10-02T21:30:59Z")
@Babale: That sounds very fair! Ping me if you start one (I don’t usually hang out in GD) and I’ll try to at least drop by. @Thudlow_Boink : ah, thanks for that. I’d completely forgotten (and still don’t remember, honestly) the discussion of moral capital, but this sounds interesting. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2023, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/50 "2023-11-13T13:20:42Z")
> [@raspberry\_hunter](#): > > Huh, again take this with a grain of salt because it’s been so long since I read it, but my reading was not that there is a “real” thing called purity (whatever that means) but that human beings will tend to construct something called “purity” or “sanctity” that is important to us, and that this is a part of psychology that we can’t discount even if rationally there’s no reason for it. Basically, I agree very much with your #2 and I think Haidt would too, but I think he would say that people DO tend to make “sanctity” constructs out of societally preconceived notions and so therefore this is going to be a societal thing that governs people’s reactions whether it makes rational sense or not. I may be missing something, but it seems like a bad example and a bad argument to me. It’s a bad example because to many people in the modern world, moral concerns extend to treatment of animals. With bestiality, it’s unclear if the animal is suffering. And furthermore, even if _this_ animal is not suffering _this_ time, a person who engages in bestiality presumably may want to repeat the act, and how can we be sure no suffering will _ever_ be caused with organisms that cannot give verbal consent? And it’s a bad argument because, as you say, the feeling of disgust is largely visceral. Why does the feeling of disgust _even exist_? It’s probably because certain acts put us more at risk of illness / disease, or producing diseased offspring, and we evolved a revulsion to those acts. But if someone were to ask me whether a particular act is moral or not, I can evaluate that act logically, and conclude that something that triggers my disgust reflex is nonetheless completely morally benign. ---
**Author:** ![kainoskairos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5e9695/32.png) [@kainoskairos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kainoskairos)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2023, 7:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/51 "2023-11-24T07:17:41Z")
There is an absolute good and bad. But we don’t determine that standard. It is determined by the Creator (God) who has already given it to us in His Word. The post-modernist / atheistic / agnostic / secular view doesn’t believe in it. They will convince you that good and bad are just subjective and relative terms that are determined by man’s reason, rationale, and majority vote…all of which are wrong. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2023, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/52 "2023-11-24T07:21:48Z")
Yes! Biden =Good. trump =Bad. It’s almost as clear as WW2. > [@DSeid](#): > > There have been societies, many of them, in which human sacrifice was the norm. In which case that society was psychopathic. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2023, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/53 "2023-11-24T07:35:07Z")
> [@kainoskairos](#): > > There is an absolute good and bad. > But we don’t determine that standard. > It is determined by the Creator (God) who > has already given it to us in His Word. Is genocide good or bad? I guess I should ask the Amalekites. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2023, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/54 "2023-11-24T07:37:47Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Is genocide good or bad? Well, if it is a choice between them killing all of your tribe or you killing them, it can be neither. Just survival. But most of the genocides “recently” have been small minorities killed off by by people they were no threat to. Those are evil. FYI. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2023, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/55 "2023-11-24T07:41:05Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Those are evil. FYI. Wow! I never realized that! Thanks for clearing that up for me! ---
**Author:** ![Darren\_Garrison](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/darren_garrison/32/92_2.png) [@Darren\_Garrison](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darren_Garrison)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2023, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/56 "2023-11-24T07:44:50Z")
> [@kainoskairos](#): > > There is an absolute good and bad. > But we don’t determine that standard. > It is determined by the Creator (God) who > has already given it to us in His Word. > > The post-modernist / atheistic / agnostic / > secular view doesn’t believe > in it. They will convince you that good and bad > are just subjective and relative terms that are > determined by man’s reason, rationale, and > majority vote…all of which are wrong. Is this being said with or without [poop in you](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/odd-question/993607)? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2023, 7:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/57 "2023-11-24T07:49:31Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > Wow! I never realized that! Thanks for clearing that up for me! You asked, didnt you? You mean, gasp, your question, wasnt sincere, it was just to get a reaction? Say it aint so! ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2023, 7:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/58 "2023-11-24T07:50:36Z")
I didn’t ask you. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2023, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/59 "2023-11-24T07:53:13Z")
You didnt put in in a PM, thus you asked all of the SDMB. So, was your question a sincere one? - either you really asked if Genocide was bad or good, or you were not posting in good faith. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2023, 7:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513/60 "2023-11-24T07:56:07Z")
If God commands genocide and God determines what is good and what is evil then genocide cannot be evil. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-still-good-and-bad/990513.md?page=4)