You just recommended Jonathan Haidt, a man whose entire thesis is that we should empathise with the moral intuitions of people who oppose civil rights, as a corrective to my reading of MLK. I don’t think you’ve understood either of them. He has been extensively criticised for false equivalence on exactly these kinds of questions.
Criticism is a good thing! That is where I am coming from. And no, it is not a correction to your reading. I did not see any connection from the letters to our conversation. I reference Haidt because he has helped me to begin understanding how so many people around me are thinking. As I said earlier, I care. I care about everyone and want the best for them. This does not mean I think they have good intentions or that they should not be corrected. It just gives a place to start. I did make a joke in my original comment that I see as similar to King’s “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” The law is obsurd, so should be the moral people.
You just recommended Jonathan Haidt, a man whose entire thesis is that we should empathise with the moral intuitions of people who oppose civil rights, as a corrective to my reading of MLK. I don’t think you’ve understood either of them. He has been extensively criticised for false equivalence on exactly these kinds of questions.
https://behavioralscientist.org/whats-wrong-with-moral-foundations-theory-and-how-to-get-moral-psychology-right/
Moral psychology and civil rights protesters: Exemplary, different, and mad -> https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/spc3.12915 This one specifically talks about MLK and Haidt’s pet theory.
Criticism is a good thing! That is where I am coming from. And no, it is not a correction to your reading. I did not see any connection from the letters to our conversation. I reference Haidt because he has helped me to begin understanding how so many people around me are thinking. As I said earlier, I care. I care about everyone and want the best for them. This does not mean I think they have good intentions or that they should not be corrected. It just gives a place to start. I did make a joke in my original comment that I see as similar to King’s “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” The law is obsurd, so should be the moral people.
You are claiming empathy while using a framework that pathologises the people you claim to care about.