I've seen this talk. Several of Haidt's discoveries are important.....for example in Canada people tend to be happier due to their sense of community. I hope everyone gets this idea.

On the other hand, Haidt's ideas and study methods are somewhat dangerous. For one thing, in his study he polled "liberals" and "conservatives". This has no scientific basis because the terms are vague, and as far as I can tell he didn't bother to give people the option of calling themselves centrists. (I admit I didn't read the paper, so anyone should feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

What's more his website says he's trying to give a "friendly slap in the face" to Athiests and liberals. Wow, that's a pretty narrow category. He's perpetuating the myth that all scientists are Athiests and that there are only 2 camps / religions when really there are a plethora of other views.

Had he used standard scientific method, he would have assigned "Democrats" and "Republicans" as his variables so there was a way of proving the categories (people actually register as being in one party or the other) and it would have been clear to the general public that his variables were limited.