Is there a connection between intelligence and political affiliation?

[Dav]

Is there a connection between intelligence and political affiliation?

No.

/thread

 

[Helte/2Skelter]

I'm British. Burkean conservative has a distinct core that while allowing differences does create a united core of conservative thought. It is a key part of conservative ideas to distrust human reason and its capacity for quick, large reform when it comes to human society.

Sorry about the mess-up, took the location under the name rather than Wessex. I wouldn't call contemporary US conservatism especially Burkean.

 

[Wessexman]

Sorry about the mess-up, took the location under the name rather than Wessex. I wouldn't call contemporary US conservatism especially Burkean.

Depends. Political and man-on-the-street thinking are always a little attenuated from the intellectual springs, but in the US the strains of traditionalist and paleo- conservatism in particularly are quite Burkean. The likes of Richard Weaver, Russell Kirk and Robert Nisbet in recent decades have been very influential Burkeans but even other conservatives including the neocons have been influenced, however slenderly, by traditional conservatism.

 

[ScottD]

Consider that US conservatives may be very different than Australian conservatives.

Oh god, you don't want to know about Australian conservatives. Take every conservative/libertarian party in the world, and subtract any of the good parts. That would not even be as bad.

 

[Wessexman]

Oh god, you don't want to know about Australian conservatives. Take every conservative/libertarian party in the world, and subtract any of the good parts. That would not even be as bad.

Bollocks. John Howard had his downsides(particularly "workchoices".) but he was at least better than the likes of Rudd. He stood up to the leftists on issues like the culture and history wars at least. It is a shame we Brits don't have someone more like him or Tony Abbot instead of the likes of Cameron and Ken Clarke.

 

[Fiddytree]

I do enjoy how the slight variations of supposed IQ score (most of which roughly in the average) across many states is meant to demonstrate the intellectual superiority of some states over others. One state having 1 point higher than the other clearly means that the former state is surely more intelligent than the latter rather than being nearly identical to one another.

What is also distressing is that I am only scratching the surface of the most preposterous dick waving contest of the past several years.

 

[Goshin]

What is also distressing is that I am only scratching the surface of the most preposterous dick waving contest of the past several years.

We have a winner. :mrgreen:

/thread

 

[Ethereal]

All this proves is that IQ is inversely proportional to common sense…:lol:

 

[swdowning]

I've looked at a few studies of IQ distribution in the U.S. Most put one standard deviation at about 15. This means that every state average IQ in this chart is within one standard deviation. It's just not that compelling.

It actually says that it's not to be taken as fact.

But even if it were, it's only showing voting results, not, as is my point, ideological identification. There are many reasons for a voter to go against his basic orientation in any given election.

So the chart isn't compelling, but at least it's meaningless.

 

[KillerAngel]

I think that we don't choose our political points of view intellectually. I think we make the decision emotionally, then we bring to bear whatever intellect we have in defense of our positions.

This explains why intellect is fairly equally distributed along the political spectrum (as is its lack).

Who chooses it emotionally? I certainly choose my intellectually. I went over about 3 dozen major social, economical, legal and political beliefs of mine, and found that about 3/4's or more were solidly right-of-center. And so I chose to associate with the Republicans.

Example: Taxes kill jobs and do nothing to add reliable and useful revenue to the government. Ergo, high taxes are bad. Ergo, I choose the republican ideal over the democratic.

 

[swdowning]

Who chooses it emotionally? I certainly choose my intellectually. I went over about 3 dozen major social, economical, legal and political beliefs of mine, and found that about 3/4's or more were solidly right-of-center. And so I chose to associate with the Republicans.

Example: Taxes kill jobs and do nothing to add reliable and useful revenue to the government. Ergo, high taxes are bad. Ergo, I choose the republican ideal over the democratic.

I know it's tempting to think that we choose our political identities intellectually, because political discussion relies so heavily on intellectual ability.

But if intellect were the sine qua non of political identity, then we would see more intelligent people at one end of the spectrum or the other. And we don't. So how do you explain the relatively equal distributions of brilliance and stupidity along the political spectrum? Why are there brilliant liberals and brilliant conservatives; stupid liberals and stupid conservatives?

 

[KillerAngel]

I know it's tempting to think that we choose our political identities intellectually, because political discussion relies so heavily on intellectual ability.

False argument. Political disscussion doesnt play any role, at least not for me; I determined my alignment on my own, based on my opinions as how best to run a state. I'm lost as to how you think people chose an alignment based on something other than which party is more in line with his/her beliefs.

But if intellect were the sine qua non of political identity, then we would see more intelligent people at one end of the spectrum or the other. And we don't. So how do you explain the relatively equal distributions of brilliance and stupidity along the political spectrum? Why are there brilliant liberals and brilliant conservatives; stupid liberals and stupid conservatives?

Another false line of reasoning. Why MUST it be true that if political alignments were chosen intellectually, then there must be more intelligent people at one end of the spectrum? Besides, that implies that one must be better than the other. People can chose intellectually between any two items without either item being superior.

I think you're confusing "choosing something intellectually" with "intelligence."

For instance, you can choose to be a democrat because you believe its more efficient to have a stronger central government, whereas I feel it's more efficient to have a weaker central gov and stronger local gov and therefore vote republican. We chose each intellectually and not emotionally, but neither is necessarily right or wrong, and neither of us is necessarily smarter.

 

[marduc]

Nahh, if anything just a difference in what hemisphere of the brain is taking the lead, and the differences between how those 2 hemispheres process information.

A couple of interesting articles (It has been a while since i read these, surprised I still was able to dig em up):

Conservative Left Brain, Liberal Right Brain

Neuropolitics.org

not exactly light reading, but rather interesting premises nonetheless.

 

[swdowning]

False argument. Political disscussion doesnt play any role, at least not for me; I determined my alignment on my own, based on my opinions as how best to run a state. I'm lost as to how you think people chose an alignment based on something other than which party is more in line with his/her beliefs.

I'm saying that belief might have a root that isn't primarily intellectual. How many of us have chosen to join a religion into which we were not born? How many of us have chosen to join political parties that are different from those of the people who raised us? A certain amount, sure, but most? I don't have data on this, but I suspect these changes are rare, and to whatever extent they do occur, some follow-up needs to take place viz how many of the "black sheep" find their ways home.

I think you're confusing "choosing something intellectually" with "intelligence."

For instance, you can choose to be a democrat because you believe its more efficient to have a stronger central government, whereas I feel it's more efficient to have a weaker central gov and stronger local gov and therefore vote republican. We chose each intellectually and not emotionally, but neither is necessarily right or wrong, and neither of us is necessarily smarter.

And yet you use the word "feel" to describe your belief. Hmmm. I have always associated feelings with emotions.

 

[mpg]

Nahh, if anything just a difference in what hemisphere of the brain is taking the lead, and the differences between how those 2 hemispheres process information.

A couple of interesting articles (It has been a while since i read these, surprised I still was able to dig em up):

Conservative Left Brain, Liberal Right Brain

Neuropolitics.org

not exactly light reading, but rather interesting premises nonetheless.

I've always felt that conservatives were left-brain and liberals were right-brain.

 

[apdst]

I dunno. Perhaps there is a connection between intelligence and party affiliation. Check out these clowns at the most Liberal college in the country.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUybMMYmpxo"]YouTube - College Hippies EVERYWHERE! (Crowder Does UCBerkeley)[/ame]

 

[swdowning]

I dunno. Perhaps there is a connection between intelligence and party affiliation. Check out these clowns at the most Liberal college in the country.

I God, Woodrow, we don't rent pigs. Because a man who wants to rent a pig, well, he's hard to stop.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Jeffersonian Libertarians are clearly the most intelligent which is displayed in their general curiosity towards science and human psychology, as well as their ability to entertain new ideas with out accepting them outright.

</ego>

P.S. thank goodness for spell check. :mrgreen:

 

[KillerAngel]

I'm saying that belief might have a root that isn't primarily intellectual. How many of us have chosen to join a religion into which we were not born? How many of us have chosen to join political parties that are different from those of the people who raised us? A certain amount, sure, but most? I don't have data on this, but I suspect these changes are rare, and to whatever extent they do occur, some follow-up needs to take place viz how many of the "black sheep" find their ways home.



And yet you use the word "feel" to describe your belief. Hmmm. I have always associated feelings with emotions.

lol, what word I use isnt a good indication. You cant discount an entire explanation of how people intellectually choose an alignment because I used the word "feel" once.

 

[Morality Games]

Yes. The side you are on is always far smarter.

 

[DrunkenAsparagus]

A lot of political debate is subjective. Even economics isn't close to being perfect

 

[DrunkenAsparagus]

We all know, however, that Libertarians are the best looking

 

[Caedon]

Why do people still believe this nonsense? Anyway, anyone with a smattering of training in statistics would recognize that such a wide variation in IQ as compared to the mean is inordinately improbable.

snopes.com: State I.Q. Voting Patterns

This was silly in 2000, old in 2004, and is ridiculous in 2009.

 

[LaMidRighter]

A lot of political debate is subjective. Even economics isn't close to being perfect

Actually, when you break that subject down to fundamentals economics are really close to a perfect science.

 

[Ikari]

The source is on the bottom of the picture. Also you are stating the averages of online IQ tests. I have an IQ of 123, but when I took an online IQ test, it told me 164.

Online IQ tests huh...hahaha. I'm not so sure those are going to be "scientific" results.