Study shows conservatism = fear in the brain

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/...ry-e6frg8y6-1225977752796

quote:

---

POLITICAL views may be hard-wired into people, according to a study that suggests those with right-wing views have a larger area of the brain associated with fear.
Scientists have found that people with conservative views have brains with larger amygdalas, almond-shaped areas in the centre of the brain often associated with anxiety and emotions, London's Daily Telegraph reports.

​

They also have smaller anterior cingulate, an area at the front of the brain associated with courage and looking on the bright side of life, than those from the opposite end of the political spectrum.

​

.......

​

The study was commissioned as a light-hearted experiment by actor Colin Firth while guest editing BBC Radio's Today program, the Press Association reported.

​

But it has now developed into a serious effort to discover whether we are programmed with a particular political view.

---

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

That's why it said the experiment started out as light-hearted. They weren't really serious about the experiment at first. The trend came as a surprise. I suspect that that quote about confirmation bias was said light-hearted as well.

I'm glad you took it as such. The whole thing was started out as a joke. The reason it made the news because they actually found a correlation from their small sample size in a joking experiment.It's like me coming up with a hypothesis that Ray Martinez is a 2 headed beast instead of some hispanic person somewhere. Wouldn't it be funny if we found out he's actually a 2 headed beast?That's what happened here. The experiment started out as a joke. Someone somewhere along the line said "hey, there must be something wrong with these people for disagreeing with us liberals hardy har har..." But then after brainscanning people they literally found a pattern and correlation in the structure of the brain.Personally, I'm all for turning this experiment into something more serious and obtainning more samples.

Not necessarily. A long time ago my philosophy professor warned me about the fallacy of the middle man. People tend to think that the middle ground (or compromise) is somehow always right. This is, of course, absurd.In fact, I have become convinced that the middle ground is rarely ever right in most cases. But that's a whole different story.That said, notice that the article said "right-wing conservative" not just conservative. In other words, they were referring to very conservative people.Added by edit.Here is an example of the middle ground being BS. This has nothing to do with politics. One of my life-long friends got into a relationship with a pregnant woman a few months ago. Now, anyone who's ever taken care of a baby would know that all it does is eat, poop, and cry in the middle of the night.Truth be told, the baby came popping out this time last month. I just got word from his "wife in name only" that during an episode of the baby crying at night he gave her an ultimatum of either him or the baby because he couldn't handle waking up in the middle of the night anymore.K (we'll call her K for now) is a sweet girl and I almost pound the hell out of S (we'll call him S for now) for hurting K like that. S is convinced that he's right, that since K was staying at his place he makes the rules. I'm on the other side of the spectrum because I think he's an asshole.Then along came Polly (another friend of ours). Polly wanted to compromise. She said that it's ok because "everyone is different". I call that the bullshit of the middle ground. When you commit to someone, especially a pregnant sweet girl like K you don't turn into an asshole because the baby is doing what he's suppose to do. "Everyone is different" is just an excuse of the middle ground.Off the top of my head, I can't think of many examples where the middle ground isn't BS. Sure, sometimes it's the best deal we can get, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's right.And sorry for the long story. Just giving an example that doesn't involve the nazi holocaust or gay marriage Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

Hey CS, which one are you in the avatar? Top or bottom?

If what you're talking about is pragmatism, then you're talking about a liberal ideal. That's not a moderate position. That's a liberal position.

Because they haven't figured out how to run motorcycles on Tibetan prayers yet.

It started out as a joke. But after brain scanning 90 people, they noticed that there was a pattern. I'm sure someone somewhere will pick this up and do a serious study. After all, the correlation is too indicative for us to dismiss.

Because a lot of these arguments aren't just simple disagreements. They're obviously wrong. They are so obviously wrong that we begin to wonder if there's anything mentally wrong with those who actually put forth these crackpot arguments.You've been on evcforum long enough to know what I mean.

So, you think there is validity to faith healing and protecting parents from consequences if their kids die from neglect? You do realize that 2 dozen states currently have laws protecting parents from legal consequences if they can prove that their kids died from faith healing, not neglect, yes?Do you think there is validity to keep questioning whether Obama was born in Hawaii or not?Do you think there's validity to anti-sodomy laws?Do you think there's validity to trying to teach creationism in the science class room?Like I said, these aren't just simple disagreements. Any middle ground is just as absurd as the right wing argument.

Coyote, have you not been paying attention? This thread has been about socons since the beginning. No, we haven't been calling them "socons", but we've done everything to describe them in short of calling them socons.This is why I've been complaining for years that the republican party has been hijacked by socons and the variations. Real conservatism is suppose to be for gay marriage, equal rights for all, etc.

Don't get me wrong. I bash all conservatives alike. Why? Because the so-called real conservatives have been letting the socons and religious right-wingers running their side.Don't forget that anti-sodomy laws were finally declared unconstitutional in 2003 by the supreme court. At the time, there were about a dozen states still having sodomy law of some kind. That's the kind of things I'm bitching about from the conservative side.Again, some of these arguments from their side are so absurd that I have to question their sanity for even considering them.Even a moderate conservative like McCain has been completely silent about the crackpots from his side of the fence making racist statements about Obama.This goes back to the other thing I've been pointing out for years. The more scientific minded, more liberal side tend to police ourselves. If I were to say something like "all christians are murderers and rapists", in no time the entire liberal population will descend upon me and smother me to death. You just don't see that kind of reaction from the conservative side. It's like a taboo for them to criticize their own.In rare cases like Murkowski calling the tea party an extremist group, those conservatives are usually ostrasized and disowned by their side.Added by edit.It takes a lot more than just a few crackpots to put these unjust laws in the book and keep them there for years. It took more than just a few crackpots to put a socon like GWB into office, someone that has a history of openly and very loudly supported the criminalization of people engaging in consensual gay sex. Don't try to sound like the real conservatives have the majority nowadays. They don't.Edited by Taz, : No reason given.