Brain Wiring Redux

[questor]

Maybe some people interested in scientific inquiry would thoughtfully consider

these articles.

 

Psyche, Science, and Society » Study finds liberal-conservative difference in brain functioning

 

Right and Left Brain Hemispheric Biases in Political and Religious Tendencies:

[REASON]

Maybe some people interested in scientific inquiry would thoughtfully consider

these articles.

 

Psyche, Science, and Society » Study finds liberal-conservative difference in brain functioning

 

Right and Left Brain Hemispheric Biases in Political and Religious Tendencies:

 

Neither of the studies you presented suggest that people are born with these tendencies hard wired.

 

In fact, the concluding statement in the first study you listed stated:

 

"Of course, this study does not, by itself, provide evidence on causality. It is possible that experience in considering alternative explanations may develop the brain regions dealing with new information."

 

This implies that Left-Brained or Right-Brained tendencies could very well be learned behaviors.

 

This is what I've been saying all along.

[questor]

Maybe this would be interesting:

 

Conservative Left Brain, Liberal Right Brain

[freeztar]

Maybe this would be interesting:

 

Conservative Left Brain, Liberal Right Brain

 

It was interesting. Nonetheless, it says nothing conclusive about your idea of political brain wiring.

[questor]

Does this open the door to the possibility my theory could have merit?

 

Neuro-Politics - March 2005

[modest]

The site questor keeps linking: Neuropolitics.org on first inspection appears completely unscientific and unsupported. It makes the most ridiculous claims such as how religious people get more enjoyment from an orgasm than non-religious people and conservative/liberal is a manifestation of different reproductive strategies which is proven because more liberal people are homosexual that conservatives. To make these claims look believable it has an assortment of cheap-looking Excel graphs and tables that appear either completely fabricated or based on their online quiz.

 

The previous brain wiring thread was closed for a reason questor. You were unable to bring anything to the table supporting your theory. Do you honestly believe this website warrants a redux?

 

~modest

[REASON]

Strike three.

 

 

What is this quest of yours all about, questor? What is this need that you have to try and prove that liberalism and conservatism are determined by some genetic construct of the brain? These are ideologies primarily geared around value systems developed through personal experiences.

 

You can't even clearly define what it means to be liberal or conservative. Different people have different notions as to what that means beyond what is portrayed and parroted by external sources. It's really just a huge swath of gray areas.

 

If I recall in the last thread, your idea was to suggest that Left-Brained oriented people (conservatives as you see it) were better suited for political leadership positions, and that we should develop some sort of classification system to direct people by their thought processes into career paths most suited to their brain orientation. Is that right?

 

To me, this sounds like the musings of some megalomaniac.

 

Where are you going with this?

[questor]

These links are to show that brain research is ongoing and may yet become specific to my theory. I never claimed my theory was proved, I offered it as a reason for easily observable behavior. The numerous research articles already published ( if one would have the interest to read them ) definitely point to support of the theory rather than negation. I would say that if one has no interest in this topic, he shouldn't waste his time on it.

[questor]

Reason, you said ''These are ideologies primarily geared around value systems developed through personal experiences.'' How do you know this to be true? Any links to research or proof this is the case? I think not. I think I

CAN tell the difference between a liberal and a conservative and offered to do so in my previous posts. We already have aptitude tests for numerous employment positions. Would you want a physics lab to hire someone who can't handle math? Would you hire a lifeguard that can't swim? Why are you hostile to the possibility my idea may have merit? Do you think there should be no aptitude assessment for the most important job in the world?

[modest]

The numerous research articles already published ( if one would have the interest to read them ) definitely point to support of the theory rather than negation.

 

Can you please point us to such a published article preferably with a link.

 

Thank you,

 

~modest

[REASON]

Reason, you said ''These are ideologies primarily geared around value systems developed through personal experiences.'' How do you know this to be true?

 

Because people are not born with inherent value systems or idologies. They are learned.

 

 

We already have aptitude tests for numerous employment positions. Would you want a physics lab to hire someone who can't handle math? Would you hire a lifeguard that can't swim? Why are you hostile to the possibility my idea may have merit? Do you think there should be no aptitude assessment for the most important job in the world?

 

First of all, I'm nowhere near "hostile" about this. I know that conservative commontators like to always talk about how liberals are hostile angry people, and I know you have painted me with the liberal brush.

 

What I reject about your ideas is the base argument behind all of this that left-brained, or conservative, people are better suited to political leadership positions. I do not believe you are actually concerned about life guards or physicists. As you've stated, we already have aptitude tests for those types of positions. But of course, they're not based on brain orientation.

 

What you appear to actually be concerned about, particularly considering what you stated in the first few pages of the original Brain Wiring thread, is that the country is going to go to hell in a hand basket because there's a good chance that a "liberal" is going to be elected to the presidency. So you are here to suggest that that is a mistake because the liberal mind is not suited to the presidency because they are right-brained oriented, and would be better suited to artsy fartsy endeavors.

 

For you, I think this is all about your fear of what's going to happen if people of your chosen political persuasion are not perpetually in power. So you are chasing this theory to try and convince as many as possible that part of the aptitude that should be considered when choosing a president is whether he is sufficiently left-brain oriented, or conservative.

 

But here's the rub. Aptitude is not driven by a person's brain orientation. It is driven by their knowledge, skill, and experience. We cannot legitimately pigeon-hole people into career paths based on their developed brain orientation.

 

In a truly free society, people should be able to choose their own paths. And if they are capable of doing the job, they shouldn't be denied simply because some questionaire determined that they have the wrong brain orientation.

 

That's called discrimination.

[questor]

Modest, if you have followed this thread, I have posted numerous links that

speak to traits and thought patterns involved with hemispheric differences.

If you don't want to do any exploration of the subject yourself, why would you belabor the subject? Maybe you should read my first post which explains the basis for all this. Is it the position of the antagonists that all research that can be done on brain patterns has been completed and there will no more

information gathered? Is it possible that some day we will learn why liberals think the government should be responsible for a citizen's welfare and a conservative thinks a person should be responsible for himself?

[REASON]

Is it possible that some day we will learn why liberals think the government should be responsible for a citizen's welfare and a conservative thinks a person should be responsible for himself?

 

Really? I was under the impression that conservatives think the people (government) should be responsible for the welfare of corporations and banks.

 

Isn't that who we're subsidizing or bailing-out these days?

 

What type of brain orientation leads to that?

[modest]

The numerous research articles already published ( if one would have the interest to read them ) definitely point to support of the theory rather than negation.

Can you please point us to such a published article preferably with a link.

 

Thank you,

 

~modest

 

Modest, if you have followed this thread, I have posted numerous links that speak to traits and thought patterns involved with hemispheric differences. If you don't want to do any exploration of the ubject yourself, why would you belabor the subject?

 

Ok, I wasn't sure that's what you were talking about. All of your links except one are to the same site: Neuropolitics.org. Nothing on that site is published nor does it qualify as scientific research. I explained this in my previous post. It seems to be a kind of talking-points-hoax complete with rhetoric about homosexual liberals who are prone to mate outside their own race and pictures of the burning world trade center towers. The best it has in the way of research is an online quiz form that anyone can fill out.

 

I'm not sure if you actually do fail to understand the problem with this or if you just prefer not to admit it, but regardless, your statement: "numerous research articles already published" is inconsistent with the multiple links to that weird site.

 

Maybe you should read my first post which explains the basis for all this.

 

Your first post is one sentence long and doesn't explain anything. It does, however, have a link to a real media source:

Study finds liberal-conservative difference in brain functioning

Which talks about a Los Angeles times story found here:

Study finds left-wing brain, right-wing brain

Which talks about a study published in Nature Neuroscience. It doesn't name the study, but fortunately gives the name of the lead author: David Amodio of NYU. Looking him up, I found his website with a list of publications:

David Amodio

From this I deduced that the study you're refering to is titled: Neurocognitive correlates of liberalism and conservatism 2007. With the title and author, I was able to go to Google Scholar and search for the publication online. After trying four or five archives that required membership, I found one that was available free and online:

http://www.psych.nyu.edu/amodiolab/Amodio%20et%20al.%20(2007

)%20Nature%20Neuro.pdf

Which is what I was asking for when I said "Can you please point us to such a published article preferably with a link. Thank you, ~modest"

 

Now that I have the one published study that I believe you were talking about, I will look at it and see if it supports what you say:

 

Is it the position of the antagonists that all research that can be done on brain patterns has been completed and there will no more information gathered? Is it possible that some day we will learn why liberals think the government should be responsible for a citizen's welfare and a conservative thinks a person should be responsible for himself?

 

But that will have to be tomorrow because I'm very tired. :phones:

 

will get back to you...

 

~modest

[questor]

Reason, by your own words you are proving the point I have been making. Your brain and mine are wired differently. I am sure I could make no argument to convince you of the ultimate gain to society for '' bailing out'' financial institutions

which have such a large impact on our economy. You have arrived at your own opinion by viewing the distress of the markets and your solution is to what...?

[REASON]

Reason, by your own words you are proving the point I have been making. Your brain and mine are wired differently.

 

questor, of course our brains are wired differently. From the moment we were born, our brains have been developing neural connections, and throughout our lives, based on our experiences and the information that we have attained, each of our brains have formed unique thought patterns. There are so many processes at work in relating to emotions, influences, exposure, education, etc., that have contributed to our current "wiring" and brain orientation.

 

I am not here to tell you that we are all wired the same. What I have been arguing against is 1) That there is scientific evidence that can substantiate the claim that there are inherent genetic propensities toward political persuasion; 2) That there is any scientific evidence to support the idea that people that have a tendency to favor a particular hemisphere are better suited to government leadership positions, or to the contrary, less suited; and 3) That we as a society should entertain the idea of segregating the population by their brain orientation with the goal of steering them toward some particular career path.

 

 

I am sure I could make no argument to convince you of the ultimate gain to society for '' bailing out'' financial institutions which have such a large impact on our economy. You have arrived at your own opinion by viewing the distress of the markets and your solution is to what...?

 

What a huge assumption you have made here. What in my statement above gives you the impression that I find anything wrong with a decision to bail out financial institutions? If I'm such the liberal that thinks we should lean on the government for everything like you have been taught to believe, wouldn't it be consistent for me to believe that corporations and banks should lean on the government as well?

 

I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy in a mindset that is abhorrent to government assistance unless it is tied to big buisiness. If individuals should be responsible for taking care of their own financial condition, why shouldn't banks and lending institutions be expected to do the same? Do you realize the types of investigations that are currently underway that are looking into instances of fraud in lending practices? Should our tax dollars be going toward providing relief for large financial institutions that may be suffering due to illegal business practices?

 

 

I arrive at my opinion based on what makes sense to me, and so often, I rely on science to help me in that regard because I think the process is credible. I'm sure you form your opinions on what makes sense to you as well, but I don't know what sources of information you find credible. But what makes sense to us is ultimately tied our understanding, our values, and what we believe is important. But we are not genetically predispositioned to values and beliefs. Those are gained through life experience. Hopefully, we are able to amend our values and beliefs if our experiences tell us that they are misguided. This is similar to the tenets of the scientific method, which I happen to find valuable. But so often, people become so ingrained in their thinking and are so desperate to prove they are right in their opinions that they will deny reality and evidence to the contrary in order to protect their beliefs.

 

Invariably, since everyone's life experiences and therefore "brain wiring" is unique, we can either focus on our differences and struggle endlessly to convince everyone to believe as we do, or we can accept our uniqueness and differences and seek to find common ground for the sake of all.

 

We have a choice.

[questor]

Reason. your quote:

'' I am not here to tell you that we are all wired the same. What I have been arguing against is 1) That there is scientific evidence that can substantiate the claim that there are inherent genetic propensities toward political persuasion; 2) That there is any scientific evidence to support the idea that people that have a tendency to favor a particular hemisphere are better suited to government leadership positions, or to the contrary, less suited; and 3) That we as a society should entertain the idea of segregating the population by their brain orientation with the goal of steering them toward some particular career path.''

My answers:

1. I have never said there is scientific evidence substantiating my theory. I have said that current research points in that direction. It will not be proved/

disproved until proper resarch is done.

2. In reading the published descriptions of hemispheric differences, you can decide for yourself which qualities are best for leadership.

3.I have never said a word about segregating the population by brain orientation or steering people against their will. You are misrepresenting and misunderstanding my words. Career aptitude tests have been in use for decades. Large businesses spend thousands of dollars engaging the services

of psychologists and professionals to suit an applicant to the job. What is wrong with hiring the best person for the job? The same holds true for politicians--we in effect hire a president for our country knowing very little about him. Does this make sense?