Political Science 101: The moral foundations of political belief

Why do political debates so often feel like moral battles? In this lesson, you’ll hear from social psychologist Jonathan Haidt, who explores how moral values influence political ideologies—often beneath our conscious awareness. Using research on how liberals and conservatives prioritize different moral foundations, Haidt offers a framework for understanding partisan divides not as purely rational disagreements, but as value-based patterns shaped by culture, psychology, and identity. 

For political science, this raises an important question: what happens to democratic dialogue when each side believes it holds the moral high ground?

Watch the TED Talk “The Moral Roots of Liberals and Conservatives” by Jonathan Haidt. In it, Haidt draws from political psychology, anthropology, and cross-cultural data to argue that liberal and conservative ideologies are rooted in different moral priorities—such as care, fairness, loyalty, and authority. He warns that without moral diversity and humility, democracy suffers. After watching the TED Talk, answer the following interactive questions.

Sample answers:

Question 1:

Strong answer:

Haidt argues that moral psychology helps explain why people align with political ideologies not just through logic or interest, but through deeply held values and instincts. This is relevant to political science because it shows that political disagreement is often rooted in different moral priorities—not just ignorance or selfishness. “Team thinking,” as Haidt puts it, makes it harder for people to understand opposing views, which can damage public discourse. In policy-making, this can lead to gridlock, because each side sees compromise as morally wrong, rather than politically necessary. It also encourages polarization, as people surround themselves with those who reinforce their moral worldview.

Weak answer: 

Haidt says psychology is part of politics because people have different morals. He thinks teams are bad for democracy because people only listen to their side and not others. That’s why there are arguments in politics.

Question 2: 

Strong answer:

Yes, I think understanding someone’s moral foundations can help reduce polarization because it forces us to see that the “other side” isn’t necessarily evil or irrational—they just prioritize different values. For example, during debates about mask mandates, some people emphasized harm and fairness (protecting the vulnerable), while others emphasized liberty and authority (resisting government control). Recognizing these different moral foundations can help shift the conversation from “you’re wrong” to “you see this differently.” That might not solve everything, but it can open the door to more respectful, productive dialogue.

Weak answer:

Maybe it could help but I think most people won’t change their minds. Everyone just thinks they’re right. Even if you understand them, it doesn’t really fix anything. Politics is just too divided now.