We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
... I've been reading Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion," which posits 5 foundations of moral reasoning, one of which is sanctity/degradation. Haidt has studied how conservatives and liberals do moral reasoning, and liberals stick to only 2 of the 5 foundations — care/harm and fairness/cheating — which is why they have a terrible time understanding (and appealing to) conservatives, who use all 5. (The other 2 are loyalty/betrayal and authority/subversion.)
I have a problem with that term "moral reasoning." I don't think it exists to any extent in real life. Some people know right from wrong, some do not, and some know but don't care. Aside from the Ten Commandments, most peoples' moral rule of thumb is to avoid, or to feel uncomfortable, doing anything their Mom or Dad would be unhappy about or dismayed by. Morals are mostly cultural, tribal. Are you listening to me, Prof. Haidt?
He is being generous when he calls it reasoning, and if you follow along you will see that he does give a lot of recognition to automatic processes and gut reactions. He does note that some of this is tribal, cultural. I feel bad that you got wrong-footed with him somehow, because despite some errors of his (I have discussed him many times) I think his general outline is quite persuasive. He has some data as well.
Now notice your own comment. Some people know right from wrong, but morals are mostly cultural, tribal. Those two ideas conflict.
I have the advantage of coming across CS Lewis's The Abolition of Man decades ago, which set the table for this and related discussions.
Assistant Village Idiot
1. Thanks to AVI for the reference to Abolition of Man, which I didn't know about.
2. Strange that a Western thinker does not include individual/society as a moral scale.
3. Strange that he doesn't see Lefties referencing authority/subversion.
I maintain that liberals all also use those other 4 (Haidt is up to 6 now) scales for rating morality as well. It didn't show up in his original questions because he chose things like the flag as purity/disgust issues. But environmentalism owes a great deal to purity/disgust responses, as does vegetarianism. And just see how quickly liberals react with disgust if he formulates a question about using a newspaper for TP if there's a picture of Gandhi or MLK on it! I agree entirely about the authority aspect as well. They have different types of authorities and loyalties.
All that said, I do think those responses are in general less a part of liberal and libertarian thinking.
Your point about the role of Mom/Dad in moral reasoning is paramount, and is a major reason for the Progressive war on the nuclear family.
I could go into long, painful detail linking all the various threads on the topic, but instead, I'll point out where their efforts have been successful, and the result - any urban black neighborhood.
A combination of marxism, eternal victimhood (and victimizing in a truly savage form), and parentless children has created a culture based on sex, violence, theft, and time preference decision making. Instant gratification, shockingly little regard for human life, and a constantly reinforced belief that all there is to life is what you can take.
Compared to middle class suburbia, where production and sound decision making are prized assets for maintaining status in the community, the Progressives have created - by removing the role of fathers in providing for wives and children - a hell on earth in perpetual need.
And the generations that grow up in that environment never develop the framework of moral reasoning, because their fathers were never there to be disappointed, and their mothers unable to articulate a life not based on dowhatchugottado.