Talk:Moral foundations theory

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Philosophy Low‑importance

	Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comment[edit]

It's an interesting Editorial Choice to label five dimensions, but count six. It leaves free space.. room for Liberty/Oppression resistænce, including to this lumper/splitter typology, and along dimensions that are not commonly anticipated. It's like an open-question prompt.. "What's the __sixth sense__ of morality?" It's clever, and cleverly consistent. It also maps well with the harmonies in reflecting on the Borlaug Major, B Major Scale (5 Sharps) as C⁶-based Life, as Si¹⁴ Religious Life rises by groundswells, so as to be increasingly interpendent, as Spiritual Machines grow more pathful than ever before.

What's the __sixth sense__ of morality? _It's human._ _It's spinal._ _It's C⁶-sensate._

Care/harm Equality/proportionality Authority Loyalty/calumny Purity/Sanctity/Degradation

(Liberty/Oppression/Resistance.. the dance, the thick culture, of the resistance) : the C⁶ Moral Dimension Reproof

Should other readers, like me, turn to the Talk Page to ask, "Why label five, but count six?", please chew this preserved liberty, this reserved, not-strictly-named category over. There's wisdom in leaving this foundational "§" dimension unlabeled or weakly-labeled in the Notes and §PACE Appendices.

It would be interesting to read the complete set of known "best fit" categories so far considered and partly-annealed on foundational dimension six.

An Aside:

For Cross-reference, _CALM_ deliberately incorporates: 1. Care (Care/harm) 2. Covenantal Coequality and Contractual Consent (Equality / proportionality) 3. Coercion-adjustment and Centripetal Centrality (Authority) 4. Calmunity (Community) 5. Cleanliness (Purity / Sanctity / Degradation), and 6. Culturelle Liberty [6th Axis, Global Soul Unit] Resistænce, ________, into the acronym's first Nomic Node (C).

CALM, in Branch and Trunk Englishes, helps reunite these moral dimension questions into a larger Century Altaring, Augmenting Life Movement, built for analysis over Microseconds, Moments, Minutes, Months, and Millenia, Metrically measured, marked by milestones, and one that's remarkably better at balancing the competing dimensions fluently across "Choices" on both deontological and teleological mixed choice drivers.

24.12.250.96 (talk) 15:42, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Number of entries[edit]

@GrimThor3: The current text is inconsistent. We say there are six 'at present' but then proceed to list five. Is 'Liberty' an accepted addition to the original list? An IP re-added it further down the list. Sizeofint (talk) 21:25, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sizeofint: In the original work, there was no reference to a "6th" foundation. Where is the source that adds liberty. Is it a work by Haidt or Graham?

This paper seems to imply it but doesn't state it explicitly.^[1] I don't really have a preference, the article just needs to be consistent.

Is that image really your own work? It looks like a screenshot of a journal article. There may be an argument that copyright does not apply since it contains only tabulated data. In that case we would need to change the license though. Sizeofint (talk) 21:05, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Iyer, Ravi; Spassena Koleva; Jesse Graham; Peter Ditto; Jonathan Haidt (21 August 2012). "Understanding Libertarian Morality: The Psychological Dispositions of Self-Identified Libertarians". PLOS One. 7 (8): 8. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0042366.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

@Sizeofint: The image is a screenshot from the pdf of "Mapping Moral Domains" by Graham. It shows the final trail of the MFQ. I have qualms about adding other foundations but I believe that making it clear that there were five originally proposed foundations by Graham and Haidt with others foundations hypothesized later. We should have a section for the original five, then another section for other proposed foundations. What are your opinions on that?

Seems like a reasonable approach to me. Sizeofint (talk) 00:19, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aside, you can sign your posts using ~~~~. It will make it easier for future readers of this talk page to follow the discussion. Sizeofint (talk) 00:20, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest noting this is a 6-factor theory. The above 2 comment headings both regard liberty and 5 vs. 6 foundations. Graham & Haidt (2012) are very clear that liberty is a moral foundation, and even that they'd measured it and shown it was distinct from the other 5 but left it out of their JPSP report. Tim bates (talk) 18:51, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Explained that the article means right-libertarianism[edit]

The word “Libertarianism” is associated with right-wing libertarianism in the US, so I wrote that the article means libertarianism in the American sense. Outside of the US, the word “libertarianism” tends to be associated more with left-libertarianism. JoeSmoe2828 (talk) 19:24, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Iyer, Ravi; Spassena Koleva; Jesse Graham; Peter Ditto; Jonathan Haidt (21 August 2012). "Understanding Libertarian Morality: The Psychological Dispositions of Self-Identified Libertarians". PLOS One. 7 (8): 8. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0042366.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)

[1]