Ever wonder why some people want to ban everything they don’t like? A new study reveals it’s not just about being conservative or liberal. The real reason might be how your brain processes right and wrong.
Researchers found that moral absolutism - believing in unchanging moral truths that apply to everyone - drives support for bans more than political party does. It’s not what you find wrong, but how rigidly you think about morality itself.
Beyond Left and Right The Core Conflict
Political scientists have long wondered why certain groups push for more bans. While conservatives do support more restrictions on average, this research digs deeper into the psychology behind it.
The study by researchers including Namrata Goyal, Lorenzo De Gregori, Yuqi Liu, and Krishna Savani shows that moral absolutism is the key factor. Absolutists see morality in black and white - if something is bad, it’s universally bad and must be stopped everywhere. Relativists see gray areas and believe context matters.
This explains why people can agree something is wrong but disagree on whether to ban it. You can read more about the original findings on PsyPost.org.
The Absolutist Mindset in Action
The study controlled for other factors and found moral absolutism still explained why people support bans. It’s not that absolutists have stricter values - they just apply those values without flexibility.
If an absolutist thinks something is immoral, they’ll likely want it banned completely, regardless of consequences or other viewpoints. This applies to everything from dress codes to speech restrictions to entertainment content.
Someone with absolutist thinking might quickly support censoring what they see as misinformation, viewing it as clearly wrong. A relativist might prefer nuanced approaches that consider free speech and evolving understanding.
Rewiring Our Understanding of Division
This research changes how we view political divides. Much of our disagreement isn’t just about different policies - it’s about different ways of processing morality itself.
Recognizing this could help reduce culture war tensions. When we understand that people disagree not just on values but on how to reason about morality, we might find better ways to talk to each other.
Other research shows how deeply our thinking patterns influence politics. Some studies even find that political beliefs correlate with actual brain structure differences. For more on this, check out our piece on Your Brain on Authoritarianism: Politics Literally Rewires Neural Hardware.
The Tech of Thought and Future Policy
In our polarized world, calls for bans seem to be everywhere. Understanding how we make moral decisions becomes more important each day.
This study shows that wanting to outlaw things often comes from believing universal moral rules must apply to everyone, no exceptions. It’s less about specific political agendas and more about deep convictions about how morality works.
For anyone trying to navigate modern policy debates, this insight matters. We might need to address not just what people want to ban, but why they think in terms of bans at all. Recognizing these fundamental differences could help us build better solutions instead of defaulting to punitive restrictions. The original study offers more academic detail on PubMed for those wanting to dive deeper.