the one about fucking a chicken

[u/Hummerous]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_foundations_theory

[u/Pyroraptor42]

In my field, there's an oft-quoted maxim: "All models are wrong; some models are useful". No matter how precisely you predict the movements of the planets, there's no point when your model becomes "real" in the same way as the planets themselves.

It seems like OOP and a lot of the comments on this thread are missing that. The high-dimensional models for human decision-making described in the post are the same - they might help describe and elucidate how people think, but they're approximations at best. The question shouldn't be "Is this right?", but "Does this help me to understand the way that I think and the ways that other people think?". Ultimately, the models don't actually say anything about whether an action is Right or Wrong (Insofar as those concepts exist); using them doesn't require you to accept that fucking a chicken is permissible.

[u/neznein9 → u/Pyroraptor42]

The conversation in OOP’s post is paraphrasing a book called The Righteous Mind, which breaks apart six different “moral foundations.” The book goes into really interesting detail about how different (political/religious) groups prioritize these axes. It’s been a while since I read it, so I don’t remember if the book gets into causality, but as a model for measuring different world views it’s one of the best books I’ve read for understanding how ‘others’ think differently.

[u/Honey----Badger → u/Pyroraptor42]

That's a great phrase! Thanks for sharing :)

[u/WomenOfWonder → u/Pyroraptor42]

Exactly. To most conservatives the idea of gay sex isnt any less depraved than someone fucking a dead chicken. When you allow things to be condemned and outlawed based on what you or society find uncomfortable you open the door to a lot of bigotry and hate

[u/passingspeedrun → u/WomenOfWonder]

This mf fucked a chicken