Are political views "hardwired?"

[What if...?]

HERE is a link to the original report (Ryota Kanai, Tom Feilden, Colin Firth and Geraint Rees. University College London Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience) and below a summary:



the "previous work" mentioned:




all sources pubmed.gov courtesy NIH

i had read of this sometime back in Scientific American (i think). pretty interesting reading, actually.

geo.

Nice post!

Supports another factor in my theory, that I'm pretty sure predates the above studies, that the original stock homo sapiens sapiens retains a higher level of adaptability to changes in ones environment than the newer, homo sapiens "pastoralis" types.

(I made up the "pastoralis" part in the interest of having a descriptor other than liberal or conservative.)

I'm open to suggestions as to an appropriate name for non-hunter-gatherer humans.

Something derived from agriculture or living together in large groups in one place, perhaps.

Please try to refrain from derogatory suggestions. I enjoy this concept and I think it worthy of broader discussion, without partisan rancor.:2wave:

 

[Geo Patric]

Nice post!

Supports another factor in my theory, that I'm pretty sure predates the above studies, that the original stock homo sapiens sapiens retains a higher level of adaptability to changes in ones environment than the newer, homo sapiens "pastoralis" types.

i am assuming that this is conjecture on your part?

interesting idea. what goes into it. how did you arrive at this?


OOPS.... i said HERE is a link... and forgot to include it.... lemme try atain...

HERE is a link to the original report.

geo.

geo.

 

[What if...?]

i am assuming that this is conjecture on your part?

interesting idea. what goes into it. how did you arrive at this?


OOPS.... i said HERE is a link... and forgot to include it.... lemme try atain...

HERE is a link to the original report.

geo.

geo.

I came up with my theory in response to encountering so many self proclaimed conservatives whose worldviews were SO different from those of the self proclaimed liberals I spent most of my time around.

Now bear in mind that I've been aware of and averse to persuasive messaging for a great many years, and this phenomenon alone did not account for this difference.

After thinking about this quite a bit, observing people through this "lens", and tossing the idea around with friends in the real life version of DP, I developed the theory of an evolutionary explanation.

Also having read both "Guns Germs and Steel" and the "Ishmael" books, I had an evolutionary turning point to plug in. The shift from hunting and gathering to full time, "totalitarian" agriculture.

The difference in lifestyle represented by this change would certainly select for different traits.

Much larger groups, resulting in the development of hierarchical power structures.

Much less variance in ones day to day life, much more specialization.

Becoming a target for "raiders".

Needing a "manager" class to count the food and pass it out, resulting in nepotism and other forms of corruption.

The list goes on, but surprisingly often fits the original model:

That the human species is dividing into two subspecies around this fundamental difference in lifestyle.

And of course a potential third, as the ruling/managing classes often breed within their own ranks.

Of course I'm talking about traits, not instincts. Nothing set in stone, and certainly not a judgement of one type as superior to the other in general.

Just better suited to a particular lifestyle.:2wave:

 

[Geo Patric]

I came up with my theory in response to encountering so many self proclaimed conservatives whose worldviews were SO different from those of the self proclaimed liberals I spent most of my time around.:

interesting. loved Guns, Germs and Steel. If it can be shown that there are two distinguishable political operating modes of cognition, it certainly begs an evolutionary explanation.

i have to go to work, but i will come back to this...

geo.

 

[What if...?]

interesting. loved Guns, Germs and Steel. If it can be shown that there are two distinguishable political operating modes of cognition, it certainly begs an evolutionary explanation.

i have to go to work, but i will come back to this...

geo.

Cool, but bear in mind, I think its a worldview difference coloring our politics.

A different set of adaptations used to approach lifes challenges manifesting in differing "leans".

 

[Goshin]

A new study published in Current Biology found that political orientations of young adults are correlated with brain structure.

Researchers conducted MRI scans of 90 young adult volunteers and found that self-described liberals have a larger anterior cingulate cortex, the part of the brain believed to be responsible for rational cognitive functions and empathy. Meanwhile, those calling themselves conservatives are more likely to have a larger amygdala, an area that is associated with emotional response and social integration.http://http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20026768-503544.html

Yet another improbable theory in a long line of theories recently, all of which attempt to make human beings out to be veritable robots, slaves to their genetic code, and therefore not responsible for their choices.

The mere fact that many human beings alter their political views over time should be solid evidence that political leaning is not "inborn and immutable".


Churchill: "A young man of twenty who isn't a liberal has no heart; a man of forty who isn't a conservative has no brain."

 

[What if...?]

Yet another improbable theory in a long line of theories recently, all of which attempt to make human beings out to be veritable robots, slaves to their genetic code, and therefore not responsible for their choices.

The mere fact that many human beings alter their political views over time should be solid evidence that political leaning is not "inborn and immutable".


Churchill: "A young man of twenty who isn't a liberal has no heart; a man of forty who isn't a conservative has no brain."

Yeah, but I'm 47, and I doubt you could kick my ass at Jeopardy!

I always interpreted that quote as MEANING that some people just go along with everybody else because its easier, not because they are smarter.

 

[Lakryte]

That's odd. I thought conservatives were heartless and greedy. Guess not.

What about libertarians? Sorry, this is stupid. How does the study define conservative and liberal? How does it control the variable of degree of liberal and conservative? How can anyone find this credible? Were participants all of the same age, health, ethnicity, gender, etc? Only 90 adults? One thing is for sure. The scientist behind the study has an incredibly small anterior cingulate cortex.

 

[Goshin]

That's odd. I thought conservatives were heartless and greedy. Guess not.

What about libertarians? Sorry, this is stupid. How does the study define conservative and liberal? How does it control the variable of degree of liberal and conservative? How can anyone find this credible? Were participants all of the same age, health, ethnicity, gender, etc? Only 90 adults? One thing is for sure. The scientist behind the study has an incredibly small anterior cingulate cortex.

Added to this is that "liberal" and "conservative" don't mean the same thing to a European as they do to an American...

 

[Lakryte]

I ask you to analyze your cognitive thinking here, as I am doing now myself. What the founding fathers thought in writing of the constitution has no bearing on how we use that document today. Their thoughts on subject matters, for example, carry no weight of the law, so cannot be enforced. All are supposed to be interpreted by the Supreme Court, the living document idea of progressives, nothing is static or cannot be changed. So original intent is of no use to us today, except in the construction of the statements, such as "shall not be infringed." Most items have no clause, and are changeable.

Problem: judges are not infallible and can act against the constitution. For example, say the Supreme court ruled that individuals could no longly freely practice Islam. You would have to agree and say because of that ruling, government has the right to ban religion. That is unconstitutional. What the founding fathers thought has the most important bearing of all...they wrote the actual document. Saying what they say doesn't matter is like taking a book and adding footnotes that complete distort everything the author was trying to say.

The constitution is an agreement between the people and government. If you want to change it, go through the amendment process. When agreements and treaties are signed, you must always look at original intent.
If you make the argument that original intent does not matter, you could literally twist the constitution into allowing the government to do absolutely anything. What then would be the purpose of a constitution?

 

[What if...?]

Damn, the fact that liberal types are risk attracted makes them dangerous to themselves and others.

The studies point to a quantifiable difference, not an inherent superiority.

In fact, the "original" stock are REMNANTS, and probably unsuited to survive in the corporate paradise we seem determined to experience.

Bear in mind, I consider myself in this remnant line.

 

[BentWingedAngel]

Damn, the fact that liberal types are risk attracted makes them dangerous to themselves and others.

The studies point to a quantifiable difference, not an inherent superiority.

In fact, the "original" stock are REMNANTS, and probably unsuited to survive in the corporate paradise we seem determined to experience.

Bear in mind, I consider myself in this remnant line.

LOL Liberal types "risk attracted?" I was told by a friend who has a PHD is psych. that I was a moth to a flame"

Now I'm thinking of an Eagles song something abvout "and they call it paradise" Gonna have to look that one up. Start a thread the wisdom of the Eagles. Remember they dedicated "Dirty Laundry" to Rupert Murdock.

Ready for smore?

Liberal & Conservative Brain Differences?
By Will Meek, PhD



Some provocative research covered by the Chicago Tribune has proposed that the brains of liberals and conservatives work differently.

David Amodio, the primary investigator, found that the anterior cingulate cortex for liberals performs differently, allowing them to think more flexibly.

The work grew out of decades of previous research suggesting that political orientation is linked to certain personality traits or styles of thinking. A review of that research published in 2003 found that conservatives tend to be more rigid and closed-minded, less tolerant of ambiguity and less open to new experiences.

It appears that conservatives have not responded well to this work, and some have taken offense. I personally think this kind of work is a fascinating way to try and understand political orientation, but I wonder how much effect this really has.

Furthermore, it would be even more interesting to find out how this brain region could be influences by environmental factors. Like could learning flexibility as a child create more of this ability structurally as an adult? No matter what, this certainly won’t be the last study on politics and psychobiology.

 

[Geo Patric]

.The mere fact that many human beings alter their political views over time should be solid evidence that political leaning is not "inborn and immutable".

careful, yiou are showing your conservative cognitive rigidity. this is lile saying that the color of your hair or you relative height is what you will live with all your life. not so. we 'grow into' our adult selves, morphologically and cognitively.

Churchill: "A young man of twenty who isn't a liberal has no heart; a man of forty who isn't a conservative has no brain."

clever and i love churchill... but you know he also carried a flask of gin wherever he went and seldom if ever drew a sober breath after the age of about 35, so...

geo.

 

[Geo Patric]

The constitution is an agreement between the people and government.

no, it is nothing of the sort. the constitution is a document that describes how the government is 'constituted', that is, how is structured, how its part relete to one another and the what powers each part does or does not have. there is no need for "an agreement between the people and government" where the government is OF the people. like having an agreement with yourself.

geo.

 

[Geo Patric]

Damn, the fact that liberal types are risk attracted makes them dangerous to themselves and others..

funny... that is exactly what many have been sating about Capitalists... risk being an essential aspect of capital investment, lending and borrowing on which capitalism is based.

THAT... we know has truth to it... just look at whtqa they do everytime some dip**** removes all the restraints.

geo.

 

[What if...?]

funny... that is exactly what many have been sating about Capitalists... risk being an essential aspect of capital investment, lending and borrowing on which capitalism is based.

THAT... we know has truth to it... just look at whtqa they do everytime some dip**** removes all the restraints.

geo.

I was actually paraphrasing one of the conservstive dismissals of the study in question the last time it came up.:2wave:

 

[What if...?]

And to the OP, it seems to me that in my model, its the more classical type of liberal and conservative that the study relates to.

Not "welfare state" liberals or "neo" conservatives.

 

[BentWingedAngel]

Here is another study..

Jack Block, a prominent psychologist of personality who in 1968 began studying a group of California preschoolers and for decades kept watch as they moved from childhood through adolescence and into adulthood. One of Professor's Block's studies published in The Journal of Research in Personality in 2006, it found that subjects who at 3 years old had seemed thin-skinned, rigid, inhibited and vulnerable tended at 23 to be political conservatives. On the other hand, 3-year-olds characterized as self-reliant, energetic, somewhat dominating and resilient were inclined to become liberals.
So another question would be how much of our personality is developed by the age of 3?

 

[d0gbreath]

I have an enlarged nucleus accumbens.

That could account for your small penius shortcumbens.