Positioning yourself as a useful advisor to a reader isn’t as easy as it may sound. No humans on the face of the planet are always “internally consistent” and “logically coherent,” to borrow from the lexicon of the Chicago School of Economics. In addition to being susceptible to inaccurate assumptions and misleading biases, the way that human brains perceive reality largely depends on circumstance and our relation to the people around us.
Many experiments with small groups have shown that what each of us understands to be acceptable—and what we consider to be the “truth”—is defined through our interactions with people close to us physically, ideologically, emotionally, and aesthetically. When the people close to us believe something to be true, that group belief becomes, for each of us, a factual reality.
The process by which we all make decisions is messy and imperfect, and the decisions we make or the way we perceive the world is not always rational or easy to predict. Your stance on various public policy issues likely hinges on your economic, ethical, religious, legal, and civic worldview, which you have used throughout your life to bring coherence to an extremely complicated world. Whether you support social service programs that benefit people experiencing homelessness, for example, may depend on whether you see yourself as a free-market capitalist or a social democrat, or it may depend on how literally you interpret religious doctrine.
To better analyze how a given policy narrative might strike our potential readers, we can use the insights from a social-psychological theory called the Moral Foundations Theory (MFT), which was developed by Jonathan Haidt and colleagues to explain how individuals’ moral values are shaped by their cultural, social, and evolutionary contexts.
Knowing your target audience’s priorities, values, and concerns will help you craft an argument that is most likely to resonate with them.
To use the moral foundations theory to write persuasive public policy, one can appeal to the six moral foundations identified by the theory:
1. Care/Harm
This foundation is based on the idea that people have an innate desire to care for others and protect them from harm. Actions that promote the well-being of others are considered moral, while those that cause harm are considered immoral.
2. Fairness/Cheating
This foundation is based on the concept of reciprocity and the belief that people should be treated fairly. Actions that promote fairness, justice, and equality are considered moral, while those that involve cheating, exploitation, or taking advantage of others are considered immoral.
3. Loyalty/Betrayal
This foundation is based on the idea of group identity and the belief that people should be loyal to their ingroup (e.g., family, tribe, nation). Actions that promote loyalty, solidarity, and patriotism are considered moral, while those that involve betrayal, disloyalty, or treachery are considered immoral.
4. Authority/Subversion
This foundation is based on the concept of hierarchy and the belief that people should respect authority and follow rules. Actions that promote obedience, respect for authority, and social order are considered moral, while those that involve subversion, rebellion, or disobedience are considered immoral.
5. Sanctity/Degradation
This foundation is based on the idea of purity and the belief that some things are sacred or pure, while others are impure or contaminated. Actions that promote cleanliness, hygiene, and respect for sacred objects or traditions are considered moral, while those that involve degradation, pollution, or sacrilege are considered immoral.
6. Liberty/Oppression
This foundation is based on the concept of individual freedom and the belief that people should have the right to pursue their own interests and goals. Actions that promote liberty, autonomy, and independence are considered moral, while those that involve coercion, oppression, or infringement on individual rights are considered immoral.
These six moral foundations are believed to be universal, but the relative importance and emphasis placed on each foundation can vary across different cultures and individuals. The theory suggests that understanding these moral foundations can help explain and predict moral attitudes and behavior toward different lines of thinking or issue framing.
By appealing to these moral foundations, a policy communicator can create a persuasive argument that resonates with a wide range of individuals and promotes the values that are most important to them.
Learn how to utilize Moral Foundations Theory in our case study of criminal justice reform:
