"Why Liberals Are More Intelligent Than Conservatives" - Psychology Today Magazine

Originally posted by The Revenant
reply to post by the owlbear

 

I couldn't agree more. The left right issue is kind of moot these days - that's an old-fashioned way of looking at things. Personally I think it's more about progressive vs regressive - except the nutties don't like being called 'regressives', makes them sound like neanderthals. LOL

Thanks everyone for letting me know about the link - I'm doing a million things at once at work...

The Rev.

Hey! Leave us knuckle dragging neanderthals out of this.

We prefer to think that we are above it all.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
May I recommend you learn the difference between forced "altruism" and giving of ones own free will?

Liberals do control the media

Much of the mass-media caters to sensationalist mob-mentality and divisive propaganda. How working for the media as it presents itself in the last decades indicates intelligence is anyones guess.

I'd label this as more of a financial drive to survive. To maintaint the critical mass of viewing ratings, the media must sensationalise and pander to regressives as well as progressives. Therefore, you'll see all of the gutter articles and more created regularly as a direct consequence of this.

If, like The Guardian you don't have vested interests controlling the reins behind the scenes, and are free to report the truth and conflicting opinions without censorship, the quality of your media increases vastly.

Funny how the Guardian is considered progressive isn't it?

The Revenant.

One more thing: The author is an Evolutionary Psychologist. Know what that is when judging his article.

Edit-to-add: The guy was fired from Psychology Today for inflammatory content

Originally posted by The Revenant
reply to post by the owlbear

 

I couldn't agree more. The left right issue is kind of moot these days - that's an old-fashioned way of looking at things. Personally I think it's more about progressive vs regressive - except the nutties don't like being called 'regressives', makes them sound like neanderthals. LOL

Thanks everyone for letting me know about the link - I'm doing a million things at once at work...

The Rev.

Nice post. Progressive vs. Regressive. This is what it is really all about.

What I think is funny is the fact that they admit that liberals own a lot of the media and show business, and then they print this article about how liberals are smarter than conservatives in a magazine about psychology.....

Maybe the magazine is printing this article as a joke? Because if I ever ran into a psychologist that takes this magazine seriously after this point I would be seriously doubting his ability to preform his/her duties.

Or maybe they are going to try to use this article as reason why we need the "fairness doctrine" because anybody can print garbage. I don't know.

reply to post by sligtlyskeptical


I would think that all people are actually progressive. Everyone wants to move forward and better their lot in life. Well, except those who think life was better in the medieval ages. (By the way, those folk are usually lefties, but that's just my experiance)

I prefer to look at a problem and game it as to possible outcomes prior and look for the solutions to enacting upon it. Just in case, ya know?

The so-called progressives would just say the hell with it all and plunge in willy-nilly, consequences be damned. Kinda like the current Administration.

Guess what…They’re finding out that there are always consequences.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
One more thing: The author is an Evolutionary Psychologist. Know what that is when judging his article.

After reading the Wikipedia article, I'm intrigued. That school of psychology sounds like a rational field, worth exploring.

By the simple fact that it concludes regressive behaviour is taught rather than inherent, means that 'regressives' have no claim to 'natural' origins.... that would be a big blow to them, hence why certain notoriously right-wing individuals decry it.

The Revenant.

Originally posted by TDawgRex

The so-called progressives would just say the hell with it all and plunge in willy-nilly, consequences be damned. Kinda like the current Administration.

Guess what…They’re finding out that there are always consequences.

You're thinking of this in purely political / economic terms - the article is describing Liberalism as more of a 'way of living' than just a political or economic outlook.

And the US administration is anything BUT liberal.

The Rev.

And now for the rest of the story.

According to the authors, “we now know” (p.369; such unequivocal claims are generally not tolerated in respectable research) that variables significantly associated with conservatism include fear and aggression, dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity, uncertainty avoidance, need for cognitive closure, personal need for structure, terror management, group-based dominance, and system justification. Conservative ideology is a “syndrome” (p. 347 & 369) and those who are caught in its dogmatic clutches are “ideal candidates to follow the next Hitler or Mussolini” (p. 346).

Beneath such rhetorical excess is a thinly veiled contempt for those who hold conservative beliefs. In a discussion concerning System Justification Theory (one of the lead author’s pet projects), the authors note that the theory is “especially well suited to address relatively puzzling cases of conservatism and right-wing allegiance among members of low-status groups, such as women and members of the working class” (p. 350).

The authors are “puzzled” as to why a woman or someone with a job (both of whom they categorize as low-status) would disagree with their viewpoint. Could it be that the woman or the worker weighed the evidence and simply arrived at a different conclusion than the authors? Impossible. Commoners cannot be trusted with such matters.

I won’t take it upon myself to apologize to conservatives on behalf of my industry. That seems presumptuous. But I am embarrassed by the methodology in this study and I am deeply troubled by the response from the psychology community. This study is being held up as exemplary research when it is better suited to the editorial pages of Mother Jones than a peer-reviewed journal.

Related article

reply to post by The Revenant


C'mon on Rev! I would like to think that you are not a mindless drone, but the more I see of your posts lately, more more I am disappointed. You usually have a valid argument, but it seems like your just pushing the broon lately.

I am beginning to suspect that you've been co'opted, and have been programmed to hate.

There's always two sides to every story.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by sligtlyskeptical

 

I would think that all people are actually progressive. Everyone wants to move forward and better their lot in life. Well, except those who think life was better in the medieval ages. (By the way, those folk are usually lefties, but that's just my experiance)

I prefer to look at a problem and game it as to possible outcomes prior and look for the solutions to enacting upon it. Just in case, ya know?

The so-called progressives would just say the hell with it all and plunge in willy-nilly, consequences be damned. Kinda like the current Administration.

Guess what…They’re finding out that there are always consequences.

Simply put, a progressive can evolve and change with the world, universe, circumstances, around them.
Things move forward. Time is supposedly linear. Voting the same way and never changing your views for 30-40 years is not good for anyone, anytime. And I am curious as to how lefties are stuck in medieval times when so called conservatives rely on a rule by God religious vote for much of their base, not unlike divine right.

reply to post by TDawgRex


I will try not to let you down. Whilst the source article I've used here is questionable, the argument presented still has merit - even if the authors should be taken lightly.

Give yourself two and a half hours, and watch some of this film - www.zeitgeistmovingforward.com...

Whilst there are different arguments put forward in the source article and TZMMF, they achieve the same result. Aberrant behaviour (regressive behaviour) is learned or taught, and generally results in right-wing (regressive) beliefs.

Also, I'd like to note that all of the critics of this article seem to leave out that they appear to be staunchly right-wing.... strange that...

The Revenant.

reply to post by SirMike

I don't know about The Rest of The Story, but it is certainly the other side; and thank you for finding that and putting up a link.

Originally posted by Heartisblack
It's just common sense

Open minded people tend to see the whole picture then close minded people who refuse to see the truth.

It's clearly a lot more complicated than that. I consider myself open-minded and generally speaking, I cannot stand liberals.

As for the study, all I can say is "nice damned try."

reply to post by the owlbear


Well, liberal leaning people have usually populated renaissance fairs, whereas conservative leaning fold tend to populate Civil War re-enactments…just a example mind you, and based off my own experience with both crowds. As a tourist, not a role player.

You may want what is best for the world, but I guarantee you that the guy next to you could give a damn....unless it benefits’ him and his own.

I’m just saying that most people want what benefits them and maybe their family. It’s human nature. How we do it collectively though is quite the battlefield.

Originally posted by Bleak

Originally posted by Heartisblack
It's just common sense

Open minded people tend to see the whole picture then close minded people who refuse to see the truth.

It's clearly a lot more complicated than that. I consider myself open-minded and generally speaking, I cannot stand liberals.

As for the study, all I can say is "nice damned try."

"Then the Emperor has won" so to speak. Studies be damned.
And to say that you are open-minded, BUT can't stand liberals...
"Only a Sith deals in absolutes"


Sorry, watching star wars with my boy right now.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by the owlbear

 

Well, liberal leaning people have usually populated renaissance fairs, whereas conservative leaning fold tend to populate Civil War re-enactments…just a example mind you, and based off my own experience with both crowds. As a tourist, not a role player.

You may want what is best for the world, but I guarantee you that the guy next to you could give a damn....unless it benefits’ him and his own.

I’m just saying that most people want what benefits them and maybe their family. It’s human nature. How we do it collectively though is quite the battlefield.

Agreed, Chief, we all want what's best for our families.
And let the record show, I'm not a LARPer, but I do enjoy a good game of dungeons and dragons with the boys and a few ales.

And...this one is key. Which would you rather attend? A Ren Faire with chicks in corsets, big flagons of ale, and turkey legs...
Or a bunch of dudes in smelly clothes popping off rifles at each other? Though I will admit the guys that get into civil war re-enactment do have the better mustaches.

Originally posted by The Revenant
reply to post by TDawgRex

 

I will try not to let you down. Whilst the source article I've used here is questionable, the argument presented still has merit - even if the authors should be taken lightly.

Give yourself two and a half hours, and watch some of this film - www.zeitgeistmovingforward.com...

Whilst there are different arguments put forward in the source article and TZMMF, they achieve the same result. Aberrant behaviour (regressive behaviour) is learned or taught, and generally results in right-wing (regressive) beliefs.

Also, I'd like to note that all of the critics of this article seem to leave out that they appear to be staunchly right-wing.... strange that...

The Revenant.

Thanks, I'll watch it this afternoon and take notes.

I have removed myself from the political aspects of ATS, except for when I am mellow and can think rationally. Yep, I've slipped from time to time, but debating politics emotionally never leads to anything constructive.

Even if neither side agrees...ever.

Originally posted by The Revenant
That school of psychology sounds like a rational field, worth exploring.

Having an Evolutionary Psychologist judge what political systems have more merit is like having a fundamentalist Christian judge which Religion has the most merit. You couldnt have chosen a more biased source to "prove" your point.

Originally posted by CasiusIgnoranze
The Democratic Party of the USA under Obama (a huge liberal) is carrying on the wars started by the Bush administration, even starting new ones.

Nick Clegg, a hardcore liberal, has been backing up the conservative policies by his conservative friend Cameron since they came into power.

Yep, they're all quite liberal alright.

I think the idea of liberal or conservative is thrown out the window once anyone comes to power.

Excellent post!!!