So, I think Haidt's work on moral foundations theory in relation to personality psychology is the path toward understanding morality outside of the subjective domain and works better than just claiming "my moral foundation is x"
Our biological framework allows us to have narrow constraints on the amount of viable interpretations of the world that do not result in undue suffering and our demise.
Otherwise, as Dostoevsky points out, humans would just "sit around and eat cakes and busy themselves with the continuation of the species." At least for a couple of weeks before smashing things to oblivion just so they'd have something to talk about.
Thats what Jung thought to. That the gods came from our imagination and were projected outside to whatbwe did not understand and that when we understood the unknown, the gods went back inside of our imaginations. And when we go back into our imagination, thats the same motif as rescuing the dead father from the belly of the whale or belly of the beast.
@therealdandan he assumed humans had a shared unconscious. He didn't understand it was behavioral in nature, he thought it was a deeply rooted think like an unconschovering. mind.
@Killian it is a term used to describe the nature of the analysis. Jungian means derived from Carl Jung. Much like Freudian means derived from Sigmund Freud.
So those micro narratives are what allow smaller groups within a structure to live together peacefully. However, im not sure how they cooperate or compete within a structure that is significantly different at the macro level
The Shoshone Piute people for example anthropomorhize coyotes as figures of the archetypal trickster. The coyote is analogous to the snake in the garden of eden story in the judeo-christian mythology.
It seems to me its because those ideas, by themselves are abstract and we make them more like us so that we have this embodiment of them to where we understand them. Then we can act them out.
Stereotyping is making base assumptions of whole groups of behavior based on observations of people within that group, regardless of positive or negative attributes.
Cultures blend, thats true. Appropriation implies malice. The US is a melting pot and the cultures have weaved together which is natural in a culturally diverse country.
Its just so observation, buts its mostly white people who get bent out of shape over supposed appropriation and the people within the supposed appropriated culture normally don't care too much.
I would argue that cultural appropriation as a concept didn't creep into the public consciousness until the social justice ideologues started screeching about it like wild banshees
