Jonathan Haidt has decided that, seeing as lunch is on the FT, we should treat ourselves to some caviar. But he has one prerequisite. “As long as it’s not Russian. We’ll make sure it’s not Russian.”
It seems appropriate that Haidt, a social psychologist known for the theory that moral intuitions are more important than conscious reasoning when it comes to decision-making and political orientation, should want to determine the moral implications of his lunch before ordering it. Still, given how much he appears to want the caviar, his commitment to living by his own principles is impressive.
Haidt — pronounced “height”, not “hate” — has devoted much of his career as an academic, writer and public intellectual to trying to get people on opposing ends of the political spectrum to understand one another despite their moral, and therefore political, differences. His willingness to engage thoughtfully in debates often characterised by tribalism and virtue-signalling has helped him win considerable influence — Barack Obama and Jeff Bezos have both recommended his most recent essay. But Haidt, professor of ethical leadership at NYU’s Stern School of Business, is not without his detractors. To his critics, he falsely equates the excesses of the progressivist activism of the left with the disregard for truth, science or the democratic process of some on the right; they accuse him of “bothsidesism”.