Why would an academic advisor want to read this book? Even those of us who live in the most homogenous communities will work with students who are socially, economically, politically and religiously different from us. Scenarios become more and more complex and thought provoking, prompting the reader to consider the situation beyond his own limited realm of beliefs. While most of us would find this distasteful, most would be hard pressed to describe it as morally wrong. Haidt asked the reader to decide whether the people in the story did anything morally wrong. They had heard that dog meat is delicious and, without anyone seeing them do so, they cut up the dog’s body, cooked it, and ate it for dinner. In the first anecdote in the book, he tells the story in which a family’s dog was killed by a car in front of their house. This book takes the reader on a journey of discovery regarding how humans think and how our preconceived notions of right and wrong shape our views. Haidt challenges the concept of conventional thinking, and compares it, as did Mencius and Hume, to preferences in what we like to eat. These anecdotes are sometimes entertaining, often thought provoking, and always instructive as we consider that which we believe. This concept of self-righteousness means that we view right and wrong from a limited view-our own-and hold righteousness in contrast with the beliefs and actions of others. Through a series of anecdotes, Haidt demonstrates how we, as humans, equate rightness with that with which we agree. While he didn’t talk about the Great Pumpkin, he did challenge his readers to discuss their views on religion and politics, even when they are in stark contrast with one other. Linus van Pelt said, 'There are three things I have learned never to discuss with people: religion, politics, and the Great Pumpkin.” In this book, Jonathan Haidt (pronounced height) didn’t heed the advice of Charlie Brown’s best friend.

The righteous mind book summary