The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt is an excellent piece of literature that provides an intuitive look into the minds of human beings to explain why certain political and religious beliefs are formulated, why and how people defend these beliefs, and how it can polarize people with relative ease. By examining the morality and psychology of humans, it allows the reader to not only look at other’s beliefs and convictions, but also look introspectively at who they are, what they believe, and just how “right” they are. While it may serve as a guide for how to discuss politics in a civil manner, I agree that it doesn’t exactly serve well as a guide to the actual American Political system, but to how political views are formulated, reinforced, and …show more content…
It examines how ethical, moral and psychological principles are present due to human evolution, and how moral foundations can affect a person’s political alignment, with focus being placed on the morals foundations behind conservatives and liberals rather than the political beliefs of these alignments, a large theme in the book that is ultimately a missed opportunity to educate about political parties, their beliefs, and role in American government. The author’s credentials as a moral psychologist rather than someone in a professional field regarding politics highlights that the credibility of political information in the book may be questionable, which is further reinforced by the fact that political bias is more likely seeing as Haidt sits on the more left side of the political spectrum as a liberal democrat, rather than being a politically neutral individual. Lastly, Haidt states several times in the introduction that the book’s focus is primarily on human history and moral psychology, rather than actual political substance. This is reinforced by the fact that the book is divided into three parts, with each part’s focus being placed on a different moral psychology principle rather than a part of American government. If the book was an effective teaching tool for American Politics, it would arguably have to be more than three parts to be effective, and the parts certainly wouldn’t focus on principles of moral psychology. I’m not knocking The Righteous Mind, or saying that it’s not academically useful whatsoever. I am saying that the book would be better suited for teaching in a belief-oriented course that focuses on psychology, ethics or morality, not a fact-oriented course that