View Full Version : Conservatives, liberals, & brain science
http://scienceprogressaction.org/intersection/2012/01/the-left-and-the-right-physiology-brain-structure-and-function-and-attentional-differences/
I find these studies very, very interesting! I hold a core belief that we all belong "in the tribe", so to speak, of the human family.
The theory that brain differences playout in our political and social beliefs is so compelling.
Interesting. I often wonder on what basis for their hypothesis scientists start out with in their research and how their thinking contributes to the results?
Interesting. I often wonder on what basis for their hypothesis scientists start out with in their research and how their thinking contributes to the results?
Me too. Perhaps the title of the author's upcoming book The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science and Reality (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1118094514/ref=as_li_tf_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=chriscmooneyc-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=1118094514) is indicative of that.
I also enjoyed seeing some of the research material used to come to his conclusion, such as : “Democrats and Republicans Can Be Differentiated By their Faces (http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0008733)". It reminds me of the pseudoscience of phrenology.
Thanks for sharing. I teach physiological psychology sometimes but had not read any studies on this subject. Isn't this stuff fascinating? :-)
I find this stuff very interesting as well. I've also noticed a strong correlation between party affiliation (and where one resides on the political spectrum, extreme to moderate) and Myers-Briggs types.
I find this stuff very interesting as well. I've also noticed a strong correlation between party affiliation (and where one resides on the political spectrum, extreme to moderate) and Myers-Briggs types.
Really? I'm an INTP. In your experience, where would that put me in the political spectrum?
I've known dozens of INTPs and INTJs (by the way, I'd put you at the P/J cusp, from observing your comments) and I'd guess that three-quarters of them have leaned to the right -- usually with great intelligence, with heaps of logic to back up and argue their viewpoints. Most NTs love to argue and convince, even as entertainment.
On the other end of things, I'm known very few NF types (INFP, ENFP, etc) who've been very far right of center. But the ones who have been are among the most fascinating to me, with interesting ideas for achieving the best of conservatism.
All very unscientific, of course. But interesting to me (but I'm a geek :) )
INFP ... left. Hmmmmm
Haven't taken the test in a very long time, tho.
INTJ here any time that I have taken the MB test and yes, logic is very important and so is debate for me. Am I more conservative than some, yes, but certainly not extreme by any means and have voted liberal when the stated positions seemed to match my values.
Maybe I will prove the neuroscience incomplete:devil:
Canadian politics is quite mild and modest, IMHO,in comparison to the partisan divide in the US although some in Canada will argue that. Many commentaries are noting that pragmatism is resolving any division that has arisen to date.
There also have been complaints that the opposition is simply against whatever party which is in power has proposed.
ApatheticNoMore
2-9-12, 2:16pm
I'm also an INTP :)
Most NTs love to argue and convince, even as entertainment.
Yes, but shhhh don't tell anyone :). And "loving arguing and convincing" is more just .... discussing ideas is interesting and frankly it is part of how I make sense of the world (wait am I arguing and convincing?). INTPs actually aren't always interested in *one right answer*, that's actually very un-INTP-ish. I mean ok they are human and have some ego just like anyone. But to be INTP means to be interested in the*process* of abstraction - big picture abstractions as a way of seeing the world (that's the N). Abstractions are INTP's toys if you will, and toying with them fun.
It's why what some see as hostile angry arguments I just see as normal debate (now when things actually deteriorate to complete hostility and name calling or just relentless verbal attack - at that point um ok ... no thanks). It's very male also but so be it.
(wait am I arguing and convincing right now?)
LOL :D
What I found very interesting in the article I read about this research is the theory that those who tend to be conservative have a frame of looking for danger, being on alert. Those who tend to be liberal have a frame of trying new things, looking for innovation. What grabbed me is that BOTH frames of reference are critically important for us to survive and thrive as a species.
I imagine an aboriginal band of our ancestors, and some of us are out looking for new horizons, while others of us are keeping watch, making sure everyone is safe. It's a dynamic combo, and the key is balancing both outlooks, and listening to each other's wisdom. There are times when risk taking is an improvement. There are times when staying safe is critical.
I have always valued conservative perspectives, which in my family is my Dad, because of this protective aspect. Being a progressive thinker, I always want to try the shiny new thing! And having someone around to advise caution and deliberation is a good thing.
I believe that there is room in our society for the continuum of perspectives, from conservative to progressive. Taking the value judgements out of those words, conserving the way things have been is of value. Progressing into new ways is of value. Where is the balance, and how do we get back to listening to each other, valuing and respecting our differences?
+1 Redfox, well done.
INTP here, tending to lean ever so slightly to the right... Does that make me an armchair quarterback?
I, like redfox, think that we're all a critical part of the human equation. The various "brains" are what keep us from plummeting off one edge or another, and I thank heaven for everyone who is Not Me, who helps me see the whole picture and not just my own small vision.
I understand that part of society that wants to take care of the less fortunate. I understand the part of society that wants to preserve the wealth they've busted their butts to obtain. I am NOT convinced, despite a thousand political media messages a day, that there isn't a solution that works for everyone - I think if we just ask the right questions, we can find it. I don't think it's particularly glamorous, and so it won't sell ad space, but that doesn't keep me from looking, asking, acting.
For example, I'm fascinated by bae's ideas around communities supporting their own. It's something I wouldn't expect to work in a larger urban setting for example, but at its core there's something there we need to pay close attention to and adapt -- someone on the far left who expects solutions to flow from government might not see. In my younger days, I would not have.
Thanks for the food for thought, redfox. It is the intelligent, thoughtful voices on this forum that will help me survive the election season!! :D
I, like redfox, think that we're all a critical part of the human equation. The various "brains" are what keep us from plummeting off one edge or another, and I thank heaven for everyone who is Not Me, who helps me see the whole picture and not just my own small vision.
I understand that part of society that wants to take care of the less fortunate. I understand the part of society that wants to preserve the wealth they've busted their butts to obtain. I am NOT convinced, despite a thousand political media messages a day, that there isn't a solution that works for everyone - I think if we just ask the right questions, we can find it. I don't think it's particularly glamorous, and so it won't sell ad space, but that doesn't keep me from looking, asking, acting.
For example, I'm fascinated by bae's ideas around communities supporting their own. It's something I wouldn't expect to work in a larger urban setting for example, but at its core there's something there we need to pay close attention to and adapt -- someone on the far left who expects solutions to flow from government might not see. In my younger days, I would not have.
Thanks for the food for thought, redfox. It is the intelligent, thoughtful voices on this forum that will help me survive the election season!! :D
Word! and, you're welcome... I like the notion of surviving the election season! Molly Ivins called it "Our quadrennial circus..." LOL!
INTJ. I'm used to being an outlier.
ETA: Hey, Alan--it's like we're connected! :~)
(Shamelessly riffing off the Allstate commercial that probably none of you have seen.)
ENFP here, though the older I get, the more that P is inching towards being a J. I'm the typical flamboyant, hippie/extrovert/progressive/opiniated type. Which means I'm happy to meet you, happy to feed you, and happy to argue politics with you!
I don't know what Meyers-Briggs type I am (but will google it) but what about those people who have both strong left and strong right political leanings depending on the issues? Where do they fit into the spectrum? Is there a "type" that fits them? To me, this sounds like typical stereotyping of political ideals and behavior of a group of people based on nothing more then personality traits. It smacks the same as the old (and very wrong IMHO) ideal that women are a certain way and behave in certain ways (and therefor are only capable of certain things) because they are right (or is it left) brained dominant. Hooey I say!! I agree with Alan that the title of the author's upcoming book "Republican, etc..." is so stereotypically negative and inflamiative that it shows the author's political slant and makes the article useless for open debate. I say this as an Obama-voting independent.
Me too. Perhaps the title of the author's upcoming book The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science and Reality (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1118094514/ref=as_li_tf_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=chriscmooneyc-20&linkCode=as2&camp=217145&creative=399373&creativeASIN=1118094514) is indicative of that.
I also enjoyed seeing some of the research material used to come to his conclusion, such as : “Democrats and Republicans Can Be Differentiated By their Faces (http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0008733)". It reminds me of the pseudoscience of phrenology.
I read the first half of the Faces study. It's pretty solid research, and done at Tufts. I find it very compelling, and there is no value judgement expressed that I could discern. I do think the title of his book is a bit inflammatory.
I read the first half of the Faces study. It's pretty solid research, and done at Tufts. I find it very compelling, and there is no value judgement expressed that I could discern. I do think the title of his book is a bit inflammatory.
Perceptions of photographs with Powerful = Republican & Warm/Caring = Democrat? I think they could have had similar results with a coin toss.
But then, I didn't go to Tufts. >8)
INTJ. I'm used to being an outlier.
ETA: Hey, Alan--it's like we're connected! :~)
(Shamelessly riffing off the Allstate commercial that probably none of you have seen.)
"No we're not." ... "Yes we are."
On the other end of things, I'm known very few NF types (INFP, ENFP, etc) who've been very far right of center.
Yes, I'm INFP--and definitely lean to the left.
Very interesting article, alan!
For a long time I've been aware of what seemed to be consistent differences between democrats and republicans in their thinking and living. It seems to be a grouping of characteristics on both sides.
As I've mentioned before, I saw a PBS show on 2 different lines of monkeys.....one was patriarchal, aggressive and the other was matriarchal, gentle. Perhaps there are 2 different evolutionary lines at work??
iris lily
2-10-12, 10:51am
Perceptions of photographs with Powerful = Republican & Warm/Caring = Democrat? I think they could have had similar results with a coin toss.
But then, I didn't go to Tufts. >8)
I'm glad you stepped in, I just couldn't bring myself to spend my precious time reviewing a facial recognition study that identified Republicans as the bad guys. Really, that is lame.
Washington University spent many years carrying out studies about parapsychology and other eerie-weerie stuff proving what exactly, I don't know. Wash U is more prestigious than Tufts, I would say. Perhaps that means that Wash U's fluff studies are more--fluffy? Or less fluffy? Let's "study" that and I will guarantee that if I give a big enough grant award to some academic department, they will design and carry out the research.
..I will guarantee that if I give a big enough grant award to some academic department, they will design and carry out the research.
I'll do ya' one better Iris. If you give a big enough grant to some academic department, they will design and carry out the research required to produce EXACTLY the results you hoped for.
But you gotta' give big!
Sadly, this is the case in so many studies (from all spots on the political spectrum). One of the first things I turn to in any study is who funded it. I have a lovely study that "proves" that global warming will be simply wonderful for the planet....making it lush and green and happy people everywhere! I am buying a new bathing suit and just can't wait! :)
I read nothing in the Tufts study that called or described R's as bad! Iris Lily, what did you see?
There isn't anything. There was the concept that participants perceived Democrats as "warm/friendly" and Republicans as "powerful," and they fully explain why that's the case in this particular study (below). If someone takes offense at being called "powerful" by a bunch of college students, well, have at it. I could take equal offense at being called "warm & friendly." Really? I'm not powerful too? How dare you! Growl snap snap.
"Moreover, the studies were conducted in the northeastern U.S. where stereotypes about the personalities related to particular political affiliations may be different from those in other areas of the country. For instance, the northeastern U.S. is typically characterized by Democrat political leadership and support for liberal legislative perspectives [26]. The finding that outgroup Republicans are seen as powerful (i.e., dominant and facially mature) and ingroup Democrats are seen as warm (i.e., likeable and trustworthy) could be confounded by the perceivers' expectations, beliefs, and desires for Democrat and Republican personalities. Although the perceivers in Study 3 did not know that they were rating targets who differed systematically on political group membership, further testing of these effects with a larger percentage of Republican perceivers would be useful for better ascertaining the nature of these effects."
Although the perceivers in Study 3 did not know that they were rating targets who differed systematically on political group membership, further testing of these effects with a larger percentage of Republican perceivers would be useful for better ascertaining the nature of these effects."[/I]
If they can find any in the northeast...
I'll volunteer my relatives there :)
I read nothing in the Tufts study that called or described R's as bad! Iris Lily, what did you see?
It's not unreasonable to think that the undergrad subjects would see powerful as a bad thing, given their recent Occupy movement with the disenfranchised 99% who want the rich and powerful 1% to give it up.
But if forced to choose I'd rather be powerful than warm and friendly.
Similar to that question "Would you rather be liked or respected?" (Not that it's an either/or). I'd choose "respected" every time. I guess that's closer to powerful. I probably look like a Republican.
loosechickens
2-11-12, 3:33pm
years ago, my sweetie said, "have you noticed that when you see pundits or participants in political discussions on TV, or Congressmen, the ones wearing toupees are almost always Republican and the ones who are bald are mostly Democrats? There were certainly exceptions, but, the perponderance did seem to be "bald - more likely to be Dem", and "toupee - more likely to be Republican".
His theory on this is that to Republicans and conservatives, external image seems to be very important. Where liberals and Democrats seem to have more of a "what the heck, what you see is what you get" kind of attitude.
He also notices at things like political conventions, women who are Republican seem to be much more carefully coiffed, wear more makeup, more likely to have red, red lipstick, etc. Again, certainly exceptions, but indicative of a personality difference that is significant between the two groups, and one group being much more conscious of image than the other.
Not scientific, but I really think our personalities and outlook on life DO inform what political viewpoints we tend to gravitate toward. That doesn't make one more good than another.
My sweetie did some work for a college some years back where they did a big Meyers-Briggs thing with employees.....he was aware of most of the politics of the administration and faculty members, and he says that they divided up fairly consistently in those tests in line with political outlook. Why would that be strange?
I even read of a study one, a long term one, where they tested kindergarten aged children for personality characteristics and predicted their politics and went back several decades later, and discovered in a large majority of cases, the predictions held.
Who can observe a group of young children and not come away with assessments about their personalities and how those personalities make them interact with others, cooperate or compete, etc.
The thing I am finding fascinating about the Republican Party today is that at least in this election cycle, they are acting much more like Democrats, which have the reputation of being like "trying to herd cats", where Republicans in the past have seemed to follow their leaders far more reliably, have a system much more hierarchial (sic?) in choosing their candidates, and a history of their electorate falling in line quickly with the chosen person. The Tea Party has thrown a monkey wrench into the Republican Party, because they are really, in many ways, much more like Democrats, and it's giving the Republican Party hissy fits right now.
People are fascinating. We all behave in ways and hold ideas that come, often, from our limbic brains, our emotional makeup, etc., and I can't see why it is for OR against either party to recognize that certain personality types gravitate to one or the other.
The most important part of this line of thinking, IMHO, is to not assign a good/bad, right/wrong value judgement to people. Red, red lipstick looks incredibly hot on many women. R women want to coif and dress up? Have at it! Us crazy hippies don't? Whatev!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8
I remember laughing so hard the first time I saw that ad, rf, I snorted beer out of my nose. Maybe it was the one guy with the lint roller.
Some people find it a swell challenge to herd cats. I just think it's a good way of rounding up a whole bunch of people I don't really want to be around in the first place.
Love that commercial. I want a cat ranch.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.