My brother recently introduced me to Moral Foundations Theory. I hadn’t heard of it before. But it seems pretty sensible. I’ll do a bit of quoting and summarizing from Wikipedia to introduce it:
The theory proposes that morality is “more than one thing”, first arguing for five foundations, and later expanding for six foundations (adding Liberty/Oppression):
- Care/Harm
- Fairness/Cheating
- Loyalty/Betrayal
- Authority/Subversion
- Sanctity/Degradation
- Liberty/Oppression.[8][7]
Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) proposes that for the most part, “moral judgment is caused by quick moral intuitions” while moral reasoning simply serves largely as a post-hoc rationalization of already formed judgments.[13]
So basically, people consider caring for others moral & harming others immoral; fairness moral & cheating immoral; loyalty moral & betrayal immoral, etc.. Interestingly, liberals tend to emphasize the first two (care & fairness) while conservatives tend to value them a;l about equally (see chart).
I find this theory interesting for a few reasons: One, it makes sense intuitively. Two, it presents a more complex landscape than the “right/wrong” duality advocated by some religious fundamentalists. Third, it provides a framework for helping us understand how liberals and conservatives perceive morality differently.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_foundations_theory#/media/File:Haidt-political_morality.png
In my view, this offers a rebuttal to those who claim that without God, there is no basis for morality: Heck, we have six foundations for morality!
Questions:
- Does this theory have merit in your view?
- Can right and wrong be absolute if you have to weigh five or six different dimensions when making a moral judgment?
- Is this framework compatible with Christianity?
- Is this framework compatible with secular humanism?