Conservative "moral circles" and multifaith engagement
Readers may recall that the Multi-faith Matters grant team did some research in moral foundations theory and brought this into conversation with evangecal theologies of multifaith engagement. This helped us understand some of the reasons why evangelicals tend toward negative perceptions of religious others and apologetic forms of engagement. I was reminded this week that our research conclusions were important. A paper was published in Nature Communications titled “Ideological differences in the expanse of the moral circle” by Adam Waytz, Ravi Iyer, Liane Young, Jonathan Haidt and Jesse Graham. Rather than wading through that long and techical paper, you will benefit from reading Connor Wood’s accessible discussion of it on his Patheos blog Science on Religion in a post titled “ Conservatives Have Smaller Moral Circles than Progressives.”
The thrust of the results of the findings are stated by Wood: “Matching up with stereotypes, conservatives seemed to care more about the people closest to them, and liberals about the wider circles of humanity.”
The key takeaways for me, in quotes from Wood’s post, are:
“The authors concluded that conservative values may stem from deeper, more basic cognitive preferences for order, predictability, and clear boundaries.”
“…conservatives’ smaller, tighter moral circles seemed to emerge out of their more fundamental preference for order and clarity.”
“…whatever their other flaws, liberal and conservative thinkers aren’t wrong about each other here: conservatives really are parochial, and liberals really do (claim to) care more about the welfare of outsiders than of their neighbors.”
What does this have to do with understanding evangelicals and multifaith engagement? These findings support other research in moral foundations theory, demonstrating that conservatives care more for clear boundaries, order, and those closest to them. This lends itself to a black and white theology and apologetic of multifaith encounters, clearly defined boundaries of “us and them,” and concern more for fellow evangelicals and Americans. This also means that theologies of multifaith engagement, multifaith dialogue, and embrace of religious others and immigrants may be perceived as blurring or compromising important moral boundaries. The data suggests that liberal moral circles are more conducive to the kinds of multifaith engagement we would like to see. In order to get conservative evangelicals to expand their moral circles, we need to understand the psychology they operate from, and work through it in strategic fashion. As I see it, calling on evangelicals to operate out of liberal moral circles while ignoring their moral framework will have limited success.