Brain structure differs in liberals, conservatives: study

reply to post by SaturnFX


I think the only thing this study is helping to do is give people like you an excuse to talk down to people and exercise your misplaced notion of superiority.

Originally posted by Billmeister

Conservatives, with the definition of "wanting things to remain the way they are", are afraid of change.

Conservatives just aren't naive enough to believe change=progress.

The notion that libs have complex minds is downright laughable. They almost always form opinions based on pure emotional reaction.

Originally posted by gandhi
Didn't read any other posts, but can you say Propaganda? And I'm talking dangerous propaganda...this needs to stop.

If its a scientific fact, then what makes it propaganda?
I think the research is worthwhile.

Here is the issue though,
Fear = security
Complexity = innovation
Both parts are needed in a society, both parts are needed for the existance of our species, just in different areas.

If a mindset is a indicator of brain structure and programming, then that could be useful to know. a fear based mindset would excel at things like security, engineering quality control, police, military, etc...a ton of careers and economies that require a healthy fixation on fear and reaction to...

the mindset of gray matter would be more for the complex things, such as science and art.

John the liberal and Jack the conservative are working on a computer game together...John codes it, Jack outlines the plots.
John creates a great and complex interaction, Jack guides the senarios that will get the heart racing...both are required to get the game done, both have different mindsets and brain makeup, both together, knowing their roles, make a fantastic game.

If it was just John, it would be a well coded and nice looking game that is all complexity and little interest/action, if Jack made the game alone, it wouldn't get done, or perhaps even started due to a inability to effectively code.

thats just a quick example of how the two mindsets can and do work together and its a very weak example, but just saying, this isn't saying conservatives are retarded, its saying that there are measurable differences in the brain that make the person function and focus on different aspects.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

I think the only thing this study is helping to do is give people like you an excuse to talk down to people and exercise your misplaced notion of superiority.

If thats all you understand me saying, then thats fine, but thats not actually what I am saying. Feel free to process it however you want, chances are, you will get from what I say whatever most effects you as a person.

But, I am not superior to you, I am just another person, some good bits, some not so good.

reply to post by SaturnFX


if fear=security, how then do you explain social programs designed to provide lots and lots of security for people, promoted primarily by liberals? does this suggest that only some liberals are not in search of security, and that literally, everyone else is (inclulding the bulk of liberals), and as a result, are fear based?

reply to post by SaturnFX


It sure came off that way when you said this:

It makes sense to me, and also makes me a bit sad. If this is determined to be an absolute fact, then there is no "talking sense" to a conservative considering they simply cannot think that way...its a wiring issue, not a intellect issue, and since they are wired to fear more than understand, then its all but pointless to even try.

Nah, no ego there.

there is no "talking sense" to a conservative considering they simply cannot think that way

okay, who's hiding the candid camera?

no really.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

if fear=security, how then do you explain social programs designed to provide lots and lots of security for people, promoted primarily by liberals? does this suggest that only some liberals are not in search of security, and that literally, everyone else is (inclulding the bulk of liberals), and as a result, are fear based?

social programs are not for security, its for prosperity.
we don't feed and educate kids in need because we fear they will be attacked, we are trying to get them to contribute to society.
that little orphan anne may grow up to be a world renouned scientist.
If it was just security (from or for them) then social programs would be basically just prisons and thats it...no homeless shelters, no education, etc...just secure them.

there are multiple definations of security also, from defensive, to foundation...you want a secure ground to build on is different than, you need to secure the front door so they don't get in...the security your discussion is foundation and net verses bolt the door.

reply to post by SaturnFX

social programs are not for security, its for prosperity.

and there's the disagreement, which has nothing to do with fear. conservatives tend to think if they are allowed to make and use their own money, they will not only be able to provide prosperity for their family, but also, that any one can do the same. and as a result of all this making of money, they create business and capital, that others can benefit from as well. without business, we all end up looking to government for prosperity and it simply can't provide it with the degree of freedom being independently employed can. i agree with social programs of various kinds and i agree several innovations were needed to get this country on track with its citizenry. nothing wrong with it, on the face of it. where it goes awry is, it can't be trusted to continue to absorb the responsibilities of its citizens, lest it decide to think for us as well.

This has all the relevance of studies that show racial difference in the brain.
It means jacksquat.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

It sure came off that way when you said this:

It makes sense to me, and also makes me a bit sad. If this is determined to be an absolute fact, then there is no "talking sense" to a conservative considering they simply cannot think that way...its a wiring issue, not a intellect issue, and since they are wired to fear more than understand, then its all but pointless to even try.

Nah, no ego there.

But, the same can be completely reversed...its basically saying there is no swaying someone to a different mindset because its simply designed differently, no brilliant arguments, no unveiling of an entire picture, it simply won't work due to trying to engage brain matter over fear.

knowing that may help in constructing a narrative differently...if you cannot truely respond to complexity, then frame a discussion hitting on fear

I also said it is not an intellectual issue, you can dumb things down to near mindlessness and that wont change anything because that isn't the issue...a conservative can also show pictures of explosions and death to a liberal and that wont change their mindset...because its nature, not nurture

I will accept it was phrased wrong, and yes, I feel superior to others...but thats just me verses the world, not liberals as a whole verses conservatives as a whole.

reply to post by soficrow


I am going to bet the editors/publishers of that magazine are liberals. Without even reading the article. Prove me wrong.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

social programs are not for security, its for prosperity.

and there's the disagreement, which has nothing to do with fear. conservatives tend to think if they are allowed to make and use their own money, they will not only be able to provide prosperity for their family, but also, that any one can do the same. and as a result of all this making of money, they create business and capital, that others can benefit from as well. without business, we all end up looking to government for prosperity and it simply can't provide it with the degree of freedom being independently employed can. i agree with social programs of various kinds and i agree several innovations were needed to get this country on track with its citizenry. nothing wrong with it, on the face of it. where it goes awry is, it can't be trusted to continue to absorb the responsibilities of its citizens, lest it decide to think for us as well.

Bow to the government, bow to the corporate masters.

I will agree with one point you made...the biggest degree of financial freedom comes from being independently employeed..aka, being the owner of a business, not just an employee...but even that has its issues, such as being imprisoned by your own worth ethics and drive, losing hours of sleep trying to make things work, etc etc etc...so, its still a prison, but at least you designed it yourself.

the discussion the libs give however is not provide everything...its provide the foundation to build on. I see foundation as critical for thriving. A good example is statistics. a upper class family tends to be upper class in the next generation. this is not because somehow they are genetically superior or become money magnets...its because they tend to have a very strong safety net and foundation to begin with which allows them the leeway they need not to waste time being concerned with where they will eat or sleep tonight should they get sick...

a poor african village will be, in a generation or two, a poor african village unless they get some help to step up...its just how things work.

America is run...actually all of society is run...by the middle class. That is the fuel that drives the car. it is important to try to make everyone move to the middle. the loudest complaints come from the ones furthest from the center...the poor want more "handouts", and the rich want less..the rich cannot understand why a poor person can't simply make it to middle class, after all, the rich person was able to make a million (even though their background was from a wealthy family and university education to begin with)..a poor person cannot understand why a rich person would want to keep more money just to sit in the bank in a week that could be used to send his entire family to university to get to the middle.

Its dynamics and intent of social programs...getting the balance right between a good foundation without stepping too far to make it comfortable in all measures. I tend to think more can be done because again, the middle class is the most critical economy and scientific resource we have...so, do whatever it takes to make a person collecting cans to save up for a can of soup and get them on the fast track to a stable point.

But this is all unrelated to the thread topic. Thanks for the response though.

reply to post by SaturnFX


there's one small problem with that: in order for the government to provide greater and greater prosperity for everyone, the businesses end up paying more and more in taxes, fees, licenses, and etc, till they can no longer stay in business. this results in the lowering of middle class business bracket to lower non business income class bracket where everyone shares a sort of communal, government run misery, adding to the amount of taxes necessary to maintain life much less prosperity.

this was mentioned in ....i think it was the declaration of independence. that the crown had so many offices , laws and means to tax the people, that they could not prosper at anything but abject poverty.

Jesus, everyone is missing the point and then getting their noses all pointy in the air over it.

It is NOT about who has a bigger brain. Or more compassion. Or how many MENSA members like to be in an ineffectual 3rd party.

It is about the BRAIN, my brain, your brain, everyones brains, the OUTPUT being CHANGED by the INPUT it receives.

Can we all follow that? Can all process that complexity?

BRAIN. OUTPUT. CHANGED BY INPUT.

Do I have to draw a damn picture? Maybe the reason some of you went from lib to con and back or around and around was because you were heavily influenced (perhaps "subliminally") by what you were putting in, and it ACTUALLY CHANGED YOUR BRAINS WIRING.

Like the meth head who smokes meth until his teeth fall out, the brains synapses wont fire correctly....so why is it hard to believe the same thing will happen if you watch too much fear based TV? How come you cant watch one damn TV "drama" that doesnt show you some messed up corpse?

Do certain people want you thinking a certain way? Why? But considering how I had to spell it out again for the second time in this thread, by this point Im apparently far past anyones ability to process these complexities.

reply to post by aching_knuckles

Im apparently far past anyones ability to process these complexities.

depends really, on whether or not the issue is as black and white as the article seems to suggest. personally, i don't think so. now if they did a study on how many democrats suffered from panic (fear) disorders, vs. how many republicans, i'd be more inclined to believe the fear factor was apparent, though not necessarily because the brain is wired incorrectly or differently, or in an inferior manner.

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

there's one small problem with that: in order for the government to provide greater and greater prosperity for everyone, the businesses end up paying more and more in taxes, fees, licenses, and etc, till they can no longer stay in business. this results in the lowering of middle class business bracket to lower non business income class bracket where everyone shares a sort of communal, government run misery, adding to the amount of taxes necessary to maintain life much less prosperity.

this was mentioned in ....i think it was the declaration of independence. that the crown had so many offices , laws and means to tax the people, that they could not prosper at anything but abject poverty.

As much as I like the 250 year old documents of wisdom and government, you can't say that is the end all/be all of knowledge, else your treating it like some holy text written by idol gods.

Lets make a picture of what your discussing and perhaps that will show the issue at hand.

You and I own a soft drink company. you and I have a difference about the taste. I say we should add some sugar to make it less bitter and easily consumed...you say that if we put in a pound of sugar per drink, people will have heart attacks and die.
I am not saying put a pound of sugar in, but just enough to sweeten the taste and make it enjoyable for all...you keep demanding it will lead to a pound of sugar.

that is relevant towards social programs and government...some is good, some is healthy..some sweetens the whole system...I don't want some draconian dictatorship, I want a foundation for all to stand on, and we make it the rest of the way...your saying that if you sweeten it even a little, it will turn into a out of control monster that will do nothing but harm.

actually, this is relevant to the discussion of the thread...I am thinking of creating a complex entity to measure effectively a result positive for the system, you are fearing overbearing aspects of the subject at hand...both are intellectual discussions and actually may prove on a micro-example the study just by accident.

and both are relevant also...yes, continuing to put more and more government in life (sugar in the soft drink) will spoil it and make it unhealthy...you need someone to chime in and warn...alternatively, without the pro-government side (sugar), the whole system would be bitter and unable to be maintained as anything positive or desirable (somolia = no sugar)

now, lets hold hands and bitch about something constructively

btw, love your stargate thread...was one of the first thread that got me hooked on ATS..

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by aching_knuckles

 

Im apparently far past anyones ability to process these complexities.

depends really, on whether or not the issue is as black and white as the article seems to suggest. personally, i don't think so. now if they did a study on how many democrats suffered from panic (fear) disorders, vs. how many republicans, i'd be more inclined to believe the fear factor was apparent, though not necessarily because the brain is wired incorrectly or differently, or in an inferior manner.

Did you not even read a word I wrote?
Its not "Person X was born this way, and they are wired that way and will always be that way"
Its more like "Person X was born, and their brain patterns were changed by the input they received. It changed their wiring and now their brain is a certain way. They could change the input, and subsequently change the brain wiring."

Whens the last time you heard a bunch of 4 year olds talking about socialism or budget cuts or entitlements? All this crap is LEARNED BEHAVIOR. What you watch and read and hear affects your mind. Garbage in, garbage out.

Yes, some children are more cautious than others, its because what they learned.....if you steal that cookie youll get spanked. Does a kid whose never been spanked have that wiring? No, because it is outside of his experience set.

Input affects output. Can you follow me? Am I just rambling like Loughner at this point, why is this so hard?

Originally posted by mc_squared
Also - sorry, but I gotta go here. It's just so fitting for this topic:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1e88f92b87a9.jpg[/atsimg]