Yeah it looks like it's just an opportunity for "unusual" datasets and research by the "outsiders" to possibly break through academia's typical cronyism.
Edit: it's actually sort of hilarious that Haidt's Moral Foundations Theory can't come up with any diversity angle. Is it foundational or not?
It's got the smell of someone selling a Grand Unified Theory being annoyed that they're asked to check off whether and how their research addresses gravity.
Some things need correction. Using samples composed of overwhelmingly white university students in social research is hilariously and obviously flawed. In that sense, lacking inclusion is like ignoring gravity.
If you're shopping a general theory about morality that encompases Christian morality and non-Christian morality, I don't see what there's to be worked up about.
Unless you haven't actually explored the world beyond your backyard. I have typically found Haidt's moral foundations to be pretty interesting but because he's always sold it as cross-cultural. So this seems a bit odd, honestly.
Extremely likely to be a virtue-signaling publicly stunt, TBQH.
Edit: it's actually sort of hilarious that Haidt's Moral Foundations Theory can't come up with any diversity angle. Is it foundational or not?
It's got the smell of someone selling a Grand Unified Theory being annoyed that they're asked to check off whether and how their research addresses gravity.