Make Stronger Political Arguments With a Moral Rethinking Approach
When you’re trying to convince someone of a political controversy, it’s hard not to get carried away with what you believe in. However, new research shows that changing a person’s political views boils down to an appeal to their personal morality.
Research by Stanford sociologists Robb Wheeler and Matthew Feinberg at the University of Toronto, and published in Personality ans Social Psychology Bulletin , shows that people are more easily persuaded by rebutting political arguments when they are revised against their particular morality. … For example, in one study, conservative participants were more persuaded to support the legalization of same-sex marriage when it was framed as an argument based on patriotism rather than an argument for fairness and equality. Likewise, liberal participants were more persuaded to support high levels of military spending when they were reoriented to call for them. Wheeler explains:
Moral rethinking is not intuitive to humans. When people are asked to provide moral political arguments, people tend to put forward the ones they believe in rather than those of the opposing audience, but research finds this type of argument unconvincing.
So before arguing in the next political discussion, give up what you believe and think about how your opponents might believe it. Their moral perspective may prioritize completely different things, and you can only handle them if you appeal to them. Of course it also helps if you know what the hell you are talking about .
Stanford Sociologist: New Research Shows How To Make Effective Policy Arguments | Stanford News