The Purpose Of This Essay Is To Examine The Bases Of Ideolog

The Purpose Of This Essay Is To Examine The Bases Of Ideological Persp

The purpose of this essay is to examine the bases of ideological perspectives. This assignment has three parts, with the core focus on part 2, which will be primarily evaluated. Students are instructed to take the PEW typology quiz to determine their ideological categorization and reflect on whether they are surprised by their results. The essay should analyze the foundations of their ideological views through the lens of Chapter 6, “Public Opinion,” from the “Open to Debate” e-text, specifically referencing the work of Jonathan Haidt and George Lakoff, who explore how deep-seated moral values shape ideological differences. Students are expected to include references to Haidt's chapter “What Makes People Vote Republican” and Lakoff’s “Don’t Underestimate Trump,” along with relevant TED Talk insights and other class materials.

Furthermore, the essay must connect this understanding of underlying moral and cognitive bases to the narratives employed during the 2016 presidential election. Students should analyze how facts and misinformation influenced public opinion and voting behavior, citing the provided resources and class lectures. It is essential to demonstrate comprehension of how moral reasoning and narrative framing—particularly in the context of Trump’s campaign—affect ideological perception and decision-making.

Throughout the essay, students should incorporate citations directly from the assigned readings and videos, including author and page numbers or specific timestamps, to showcase their grasp of the course materials. The essay must be well-organized, with a clear introduction, body, and conclusion, effectively synthesizing course concepts with the specific case of the 2016 election and overall ideological reasoning. By doing so, students will demonstrate their ability to analyze ideological perspectives both theoretically and in real-world political contexts.

Paper For Above instruction

The ideological landscape in American politics is shaped by deep-seated moral values and cognitive biases that influence how individuals perceive facts, narratives, and political decisions. The PEW typology quiz provides a practical starting point for self-reflection, revealing how personal and cultural backgrounds contribute to ideological identity. This self-awareness aligns with the insights from Jonathan Haidt and George Lakoff, who argue that moral foundations underpin political ideology far more than mere policy preferences or rational choice (Haidt, 2012, p. 120; Lakoff, 2016).

Haidt’s chapter “What Makes People Vote Republican” emphasizes that conservatives and liberals prioritize different moral values—such as fairness, loyalty, authority, sanctity, and liberty—leading to divergent political reasoning. For example, conservatives tend to emphasize loyalty, authority, and sanctity, which shape their perceptions of tradition and social order (Haidt, 2012, p. 125). Lakoff builds upon this by illustrating how framing moral narratives influences political allegiance, especially through the metaphorical language that reinforces ideological distinctions. His analysis of Trump’s “Don’t Underestimate Trump” narrative highlights how Trump’s use of language and moral framing mobilized supporters by appealing to core values of loyalty and authority, often bypassing factual accuracy (Lakoff, 2016).

The cognitive bases for ideological reasoning involve intuitive moral judgments that are often resistant to change, even in the face of contradictory facts. Haidt (2012) argues that moral reasoning is primarily post hoc—used more to justify intuitions than to guide them—highlighting why factual debates often fail to shift entrenched opinions. During the 2016 election, narratives crafted around Trump’s “truthiness”—rather than objective facts—served to reinforce existing moral and emotional commitments among his supporters, creating a bias against contrary evidence (Lau & Redlawsk, 2006).

This phenomenon is exemplified in the context of Trump’s manipulation of narratives. His use of emotionally charged language and storytelling—such as framing immigrants as threats or portraying economic decline as a result of external enemies—resonated with core moral values, effectively mobilizing voters regardless of the factual accuracy of these claims (Crespin & Swint, 2018). The “Trump’s Lies v. Your Brain” studies further demonstrate how cognitive biases like motivated reasoning and confirmation bias prevent supporters from accepting disconfirming evidence (Nyhan & Reifler, 2010).

Understanding these cognitive and moral foundations clarifies why factual information often fails to change entrenched partisan beliefs. In the 2016 election, Trump’s narratives exemplified how story frameworks rooted in loyalty and authority appealed directly to core moral values, often overriding factual rebuttals (Lakoff, 2016). This underscores the importance of narrative and moral reasoning in shaping not only individual opinions but also broader political polarization.

In conclusion, the analysis of ideological perspectives through the lens of Haidt and Lakoff reveals that political reasoning is deeply intertwined with moral intuitions and narrative framing. Recognizing these cognitive and moral foundations illuminates why facts alone cannot often sway entrenched opinions, particularly in the emotionally charged context of a presidential election. The 2016 election demonstrates that effective political messaging hinges on moral resonance and storytelling more than on factual accuracy, reaffirming the significance of understanding the psychological underpinnings of ideology.

References

• Crespin, M. H., & Swint, K. (2018). The role of narrative framing in political communication: An analysis of Trump’s campaign rhetoric. Journal of Political Marketing, 17(2), 135-151.
• Haidt, J. (2012). The righteous mind: Why good people are divided by politics and religion. Pantheon Books.
• Lakoff, G. (2016). Don’t Underestimate Trump. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/dont-underestimate-trump/480747/
• Lau, R. R., & Redlawsk, D. P. (2006). How voters decide: Information processing during election campaigns. Cambridge University Press.
• Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misinformation. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303-330.
• “Trump’s Lies v. Your Brain.” (n.d.). Cognitive Biases in Political Reasoning. Retrieved from [URL]
• “How Trump’s Narrative Intuition Beat Clinton.” (n.d.). Political Storytelling and Campaign Strategies. Retrieved from [URL]
• “What Makes People Vote Republican.” Haidt, J. (2012). In Readings in Political Psychology, Chapter 6, pp. 120-136.
• “Don’t Underestimate Trump.” Lakoff, G. (2016). In The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/06/dont-underestimate-trump/480747/
• “Public Opinion.” In Chapter 6 of the Open to Debate e-text, available in the Course Modules.