The Righteous Mind - Why People Are Divided by Politics and Religion – A Summary

Introduction

In The Righteous Mind: Why People Are Divided by Politics and Religion, social psychologist Jonathan Haidt explores why people hold such deeply entrenched moral and political beliefs. He argues that our moral judgments stem more from intuition than from conscious reasoning, which leads to polarization in politics and religion. Haidt draws from psychology, anthropology, and evolutionary theory to explain why humans are so divided—and how we can better understand one another.

The Rider and the Elephant: Intuition vs. Reason

Haidt introduces a compelling metaphor: our minds are like a rider on an elephant. The elephant represents our intuitive, emotional reactions, while the rider is our rational mind, which often acts as a press secretary justifying the elephant’s movements rather than truly guiding them. In other words, we don’t reason our way to moral positions—we feel them first and then rationalize them afterward.

This challenges the common belief that people arrive at their political or religious views through careful deliberation. Instead, Haidt suggests that our intuitions shape our beliefs, and reason comes in later to justify those intuitions. This explains why debates about politics and religion are so emotionally charged—people are defending deeply ingrained instincts rather than purely logical conclusions.

The Six Moral Foundations

One of the book’s most significant contributions is Haidt’s Moral Foundations Theory, which identifies six core moral values that different groups emphasize to varying degrees:

1. Care/harm – Compassion for the vulnerable and a desire to prevent suffering.
2. Fairness/cheating – Justice, equality, and reciprocity.
3. Loyalty/betrayal – Group identity and allegiance.
4. Authority/subversion – Respect for tradition and legitimate authority.
5. Sanctity/degradation – Concerns about purity, whether in a religious, cultural, or physical sense.
6. Liberty/oppression – Resistance to domination and a desire for individual freedom.

Liberals, Haidt argues, primarily focus on the first two foundations (care and fairness), while conservatives appeal to a broader moral palette that includes loyalty, authority, and sanctity. This explains why liberals and conservatives often talk past each other—each side emphasizes different moral priorities.

The Evolution of Morality and Tribalism

Haidt traces the origins of human morality back to our evolutionary past. He argues that humans evolved as both selfish individuals and cooperative group members. Our tribal instincts lead us to form strong in-group identities, whether based on religion, nationality, or political ideology. While this tribalism helped our ancestors survive, it also makes it difficult for us to empathize with those who hold opposing views today.

This evolutionary perspective sheds light on political and religious divisions. People naturally gravitate toward groups that reinforce their moral intuitions, and once within those groups, they become more resistant to opposing viewpoints. This explains why political discourse can feel like an us-vs-them battle rather than an open exchange of ideas.

Overcoming Divisions: A Path to Understanding

Despite highlighting the deep roots of our moral and political divisions, Haidt remains hopeful. He suggests that understanding different moral foundations can help bridge ideological divides. Instead of assuming the other side is irrational or immoral, we should recognize that they are simply operating from a different moral framework.

By stepping outside of our moral comfort zones and genuinely listening to others, we can foster more meaningful conversations. Haidt’s work encourages us to approach political and religious differences with curiosity rather than hostility.

Conclusion

The Righteous Mind offers a profound exploration of why people are so divided by politics and religion. Haidt’s insights into human psychology, morality, and evolution provide a framework for understanding—and potentially overcoming—these divisions. The key takeaway is that moral reasoning is not as objective as we often assume. Instead, it is deeply shaped by intuition, culture, and evolution. By recognizing this, we can engage with others more constructively and work toward greater social cohesion.