OT: Where's the media on this one?

Voted Worlds #1 Most Loonatic Fanbase

Moderator: Andrew

Postby conversationpc » Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:58 pm

7 Wishes wrote:This affirms my long-held belief that Democrats are more open-minded than conservatives:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070909/hl_afp/scienceneuroscience;_ylt=Au5ZOi9_JIqcRMkxJuA82GWKOrgF

PARIS (AFP) - The brain neurons of liberals and conservatives fire differently when confronted with tough choices, suggesting that some political divides may be hard-wired, according a study released Sunday.
ADVERTISEMENT

Aristotle may have been more on the mark than he realised when he said that man is by nature a political animal.

Dozens of previous studies have established a strong link between political persuasion and certain personality traits.

Conservatives tend to crave order and structure in their lives, and are more consistent in the way they make decisions. Liberals, by contrast, show a higher tolerance for ambiguity and complexity, and adapt more easily to unexpected circumstances.

The affinity between political views and "cognitive style" has also been shown to be heritable, handed down from parents to children, said the study, published in the British journal Nature Neuroscience.

Intrigued by these correlations, New York University political scientist David Amodio and colleagues decided to find out if the brains of liberals and conservatives reacted differently to the same stimuli.

A group of 43 right-handed subjects were asked to perform a series of computer tests designed to evaluate their unrehearsed response to cues urging them to break a well-established routine.

"People often drive home from work on the same route, day after day, such that it becomes habitual and doesn't involve much thinking," Amodio explained by way of comparison in an e-mail.

"But occasionally there is road work, or perhaps an animal crosses the road, and you need to break out of your habitual response in order to deal with this new information."

Using electroencephalographs, which measure neuronal impulses, the researchers examined activity in a part of the brain -- the anterior cingulate cortex -- that is strongly linked with the self-regulatory process of conflict monitoring.

The match-up was unmistakable: respondents who had described themselves as liberals showed "significantly greater conflict-related neural activity" when the hypothetical situation called for an unscheduled break in routine.

Conservatives, however, were less flexible, refusing to deviate from old habits "despite signals that this ... should be changed."

Whether that is good or bad, of course, depends on one's perspective: one could interpret the results to mean that liberals are nimble-minded and conservatives rigid and stubborn.

Or one could, with equal justice, conclude that wishy-washy liberals don't stick to their guns, while conservatives and steadfast and loyal.

As to the more intriguing question of which comes first, the patterns in neuron activity or the political orientation, Amodio is reluctant to hazard a guess.

"The neural mechanisms for conflict monitoring are formed early in childhood," and are probably rooted in part in our genetic heritage, he said.

"But even if genes may provide a blueprint for more liberal or conservative orientations, they are shaped substantially by one's environment over the course of development," he added.

Obscuring causal links even more is the fact that the brain is malleable and neural functions can change as a result of new experiences.


:lol:

The fact that you would so easily believe something that smells of junk science is proof that some liberals don't know BS when they see, hear, or smell it. Besides that, if you actually take the time to read it, there are several hems and haws in the argument that show this doesn't necessarily prove one way or the other that political views are hereditary.

Besides that, if they are hereditary, how does that explain the fact that many people change their political views over time? Many people start out liberal and end up conservative. Many start out conservative and end up liberal.

Also, the article mentions that "43 right-handed subjects", blah blah blah. So, let me get this straight. Are they saying that being right or left-handed also has something to do with political views? If so, why is there no mention of any of the left-handed people involved in the study?

The whole thing smells really bad.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby 7 Wishes » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:00 am

conversationpc wrote:
The fact that you would so easily believe something that smells of junk science is proof that some liberals don't know BS when they see, hear, or smell it. Besides that, if you actually take the time to read it, there are several hems and haws in the argument that show this doesn't necessarily prove one way or the other that political views are hereditary.

Besides that, if they are hereditary, how does that explain the fact that many people change their political views over time? Many people start out liberal and end up conservative. Many start out conservative and end up liberal.

Also, the article mentions that "43 right-handed subjects", blah blah blah. So, let me get this straight. Are they saying that being right or left-handed also has something to do with political views? If so, why is there no mention of any of the left-handed people involved in the study?

The whole thing smells really bad.


Unbelievable! You guys come out of the woodwork with some obscure "study" by a right-wing nut professor in a study with such a small sample population that it's laughable, completely ignore (out of convenience or lack of any viable response) all the factual data that's put in front of you, and then attempt to brush off scientific research that contradicts your opinions by dismissing it as "smelling really bad". Come on. For ONCE, admit that someone who's not a die-hard NRA-loving, Bush-worshipping dittohead says is actually truthful or insightful, and leave it at that.

Your response is EXACTLY what one would expect given the hypothesis of the researchers. Thanks for validating it!
User avatar
7 Wishes
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4305
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:28 pm

Postby lights1961 » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:07 am

Rockindeano wrote:
weatherman90 wrote:Democrats and Republicans alike all have their share of scandals. The only difference is that the media grabs onto the Republican scandals and won't let go.



Yeah, it's so unfair :roll:

You republicans are a whiny bunch. Stop the corruption. If Fienstein did this, she too can go to Hell, but the GOP is just so much more corrupt it's not even funny.


i just realised you are an idiot on this subject...
lights1961
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5362
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 7:33 am

Postby heardonthestreet » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:40 am

frfksakes wrote:The sad part is that there are very few people on either side that aren’t scumbags, or whores, or worse - cowards.
& the decent ones are up against a huge, well oiled machine that has every incentive to keep things exactly as they are.

I have no idea how anyone without money has a chance in hell of changing things, and frankly it scares me to death.




Best post of the thread.
User avatar
heardonthestreet
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2351
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 3:23 am
Location: "How Can I Keep From Singing?"

Re: OT: Where's the media on this one?

Postby heardonthestreet » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:43 am

conversationpc wrote:
NealIsGod wrote:
frfksakes wrote:
conversationpc wrote:While the media and libs clamour to cast stones at Republicans ala the Larry Craig scandal,




Larry Craig is such a big scandal because it's hysterical that so many gay bashing republicans are getting caught being gay (even if only for the moment, lol).

It’s disgusting that he tried to have promiscuous sex in a public bathroom, but it’s huge news because of the homophobic crap that has come out of his mouth for years.



Funny how the loudest homophobes seem to be gay themselves.


Exactly. I wonder if that applies to some of the people here and at the TBJF as well?







Second best post!
User avatar
heardonthestreet
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 2351
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 3:23 am
Location: "How Can I Keep From Singing?"

Re: OT: Where's the media on this one?

Postby yak » Tue Sep 11, 2007 2:50 am

heardonthestreet wrote:Second best post!


Since you're so excited about two posts with which you agree.......

Have a Great Day! :D



Image
What To Do When You See a Loon Coming


Image
User avatar
yak
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1362
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 10:46 am

Postby conversationpc » Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:04 am

7 Wishes wrote:Unbelievable! You guys come out of the woodwork with some obscure "study" by a right-wing nut professor in a study with such a small sample population that it's laughable, completely ignore (out of convenience or lack of any viable response) all the factual data that's put in front of you, and then attempt to brush off scientific research that contradicts your opinions by dismissing it as "smelling really bad". Come on. For ONCE, admit that someone who's not a die-hard NRA-loving, Bush-worshipping dittohead says is actually truthful or insightful, and leave it at that.

Your response is EXACTLY what one would expect given the hypothesis of the researchers. Thanks for validating it!


Unbelievable that a moron like yourself can't use common sense to refute the study on his own without resorting to the liberal talking points that have been pounded into your thick skull.

Secondly, your inference about NRA-loving and Bush-worshipping couldn't be further from the truth. I've never been a member of the NRA and wouldn't touch any of them with a ten foot pole and I've criticized Bush more times on this forum than I could count. Put down the toke long enough to let a few brain cells do some actual work and you might be able to read and comprehend some of the things that have been posted here.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby 7 Wishes » Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:32 am

conversationpc wrote:
Secondly, your inference about NRA-loving and Bush-worshipping couldn't be further from the truth. I've never been a member of the NRA and wouldn't touch any of them with a ten foot pole and I've criticized Bush more times on this forum than I could count. Put down the toke long enough to let a few brain cells do some actual work and you might be able to read and comprehend some of the things that have been posted here.


You are a major league asshole, Dave. You're always right, and everyone else is always wrong. No exceptions. I've always acquiesced when someone has presented me with information that puts into doubt or countradicts what I believe to be true.

You do not have that capability. It's always your way or the highway. Before you condescend me and tell me to "put down the toke", I would like to make two points that usually would have no relevance and I would never bring up.

One. I am a highly educated, very intelligent individual who has traveled the world, read thousands of books, and imersed himself in anthropology, history, music, the arts, and, unfortunately, politics.

Two. I have never, nor will I ever, use any illegal drugs. I don't smoke pot, nor have I ever used any recreational drugs.

There. Now get off your perch, OK? Your obstinance on this issue - and every other one - is proof positive that some neo-cons like you have NO capacity for considering ANYTHING that would counter anything in their belief systems. Again, I reiterate: by assailing me as you have, you are proving the facts outlined in the aforementioned study.
User avatar
7 Wishes
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4305
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:28 pm

Postby conversationpc » Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:37 am

7 Wishes wrote:You are a major league asshole, Dave. You're always right, and everyone else is always wrong. No exceptions. I've always acquiesced when someone has presented me with information that puts into doubt or countradicts what I believe to be true.

You do not have that capability. It's always your way or the highway. Before you condescend me and tell me to "put down the toke", I would like to make two points that usually would have no relevance and I would never bring up.


Give me a break, dude. I don't come across any more that way than you do in your own posts. Take a look in the mirror, pal. You don't come across as any less hard-headed or willing to learn something new than I do.

Two. I have never, nor will I ever, use any illegal drugs. I don't smoke pot, nor have I ever used any recreational drugs.


My apologies for that remark.

There. Now get off your perch, OK? Your obstinance on this issue - and every other one - is proof positive that some neo-cons like you have NO capacity for considering ANYTHING that would counter anything in their belief systems. Again, I reiterate: by assailing me as you have, you are proving the facts outlined in the aforementioned study.


Again, you assail me and other conservatives in this thread but when we assail you, that's somehow okay. Unless you're a vampire, the mirror reflects your faults just as it does others.

Let me get something straight about my political views...

I am a conservative. I make no bones about it. I also hold views that are more moderate or libertarian. When I've been presented with information that contradicts what I believe, I will change my opinion. I used to be a big supporter of Bush several years ago. I still don't think he's the devil as many others do, but he's also not the worst. I'll leave that distinction to Carter. He's a big disappointment, though, in many ways.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby 7 Wishes » Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:57 am

See? This is how political differences should be discussed. I certainly have been unecessarily belligerent at times.

BTW...not to be inflammatory...but a Gallup poll conducted in 2005 (using a huge cross sample of the population) showed that people in the Blue States (i.e the northeast, California and Michigan) were 31% more likely to hold a college degree than those in the Red States (the south and the midwest). Now I, for one, do not equate a college education (or lack thereof) with intelligence. Opportunity, definitely. But I have plenty of friends who never attended or graduated from a university who are many times more brilliant than some of my friends and associates. The only reason I brought this up is that it flies directly in the face of the assertions of that college professor who, as I stated earlier, used such a ridiculously small population from which to draw his conclusions as to render his hypothesis invalid.
User avatar
7 Wishes
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4305
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:28 pm

Postby RedWingFan » Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:12 am

7 Wishes wrote:BTW...not to be inflammatory...but a Gallup poll conducted in 2005 (using a huge cross sample of the population) showed that people in the Blue States (i.e the northeast, California and Michigan) were 31% more likely to hold a college degree than those in the Red States (the south and the midwest).

Hello from Michigan and also a college graduate. With our current tax rate (and proposed new taxes) unemployment here is still topping 7 and pushing 8%. I'm currently persuing out of state leads on jobs and will ditch my current job the first chance I get. This liberal nanny state is crumbling upon itself. Thought you'd like to hear that firsthand! I'm not the only one leaving, businesses are fleeing too. For those in California think Gray Davis. The only thing we don't have here are the rolling blackouts :D
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7868
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Postby conversationpc » Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:15 am

RaiderFan wrote:For those in California think Gray Davis. The only thing we don't have here are the rolling blackouts :D


There's a slogan for you. Michigan: California without the rolling blackouts. :lol:
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby RedWingFan » Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:42 am

conversationpc wrote:
RaiderFan wrote:For those in California think Gray Davis. The only thing we don't have here are the rolling blackouts :D


There's a slogan for you. Michigan: California without the rolling blackouts. :lol:

:lol: Yeah, I'm gonna email this suggestion to Governor Granholm right away!!!! :lol:
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7868
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Postby RedWingFan » Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:05 am

7 Wishes wrote:Let's see...he KNOWINGLY lied about Iraq's "possession" of WMD

If Bush knowingly lied, then all the Democrats and other foreign leaders lied. As well as Bill Clinton. Did they all lie? Did they all have faulty intel? Were the WMD's smuggled to Syria?
7 Wishes wrote:its involvement with 9/11 (ZERO!)

You do realize that we are in the process of killing members of Al-Qaeda in Iraq. Al-Qaeda did claim credit for the attacks. Why does it matter where we kill them? Are you just mourning Hussein and his kids?
7 Wishes wrote:That's just a LITTLE more of a violation of national security than fudging about oral sex under oath.

Ah, so looking directly into the camera and telling a bold faced lie about a personal experience is just a fudge. But going off of intel that depends on the credibility of the source is, "he KNOWINGLY lied"? :roll:
7 Wishes wrote:Let's see...the media helped get Clinton impeached because of its reporting on his shenanigans....

The media didn't have a choice. Newsweek was sitting on the story when Drudge got ahold of it and blew the lid off. They couldn't put the genie back in the lamp, or the cigar back in the wrapper, whichever you prefer.
7 Wishes wrote:Yeah, the media is liberally slanted. Whatever. That's why Coulter, Fox "News", HANNITY and colmes

Dude you forgot to colorize Colmes in liberal blue. But that would have worked against your slanted accusation huh. :lol:
7 Wishes wrote: Name one liberally slanted radio or TV news program. And don't say NPR, because that assertion has already been incontrovertibly refuted.

Uh, does Air America still count even though they're bankrupt? Morally and financially :lol: Anyway, Chris Mattews? Kieth Olberman?
Seven Wishes wrote:"Abysmal? He's the most proactive President since Clinton, and he's bringing much-needed change for the better to a nation that has been tyrannized by the worst President since Hoover."- 7 Wishes on Pres. Obama
User avatar
RedWingFan
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7868
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: The Peoples Republic of Michigan

Previous

Return to Journey

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests