It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences employs a rather unique practice called "Open Peer Commentary": An article of major significance is published, a large number of fellow scholars comment on it, and then the original author responds to all of them. The approach has many virtues, one of which being that it lets you see where a community of scholars and thinkers stand with respect to a controversial or provocative scientific idea. And in the latest issue of the journal, this process reveals the following conclusion: A large body of political scientists and political psychologists now concur that liberals and conservatives disagree about politics in part because they are different people at the level of personality, psychology, and even traits like physiology and genetics.
That's a big deal. It challenges everything that we thought we knew about politics—upending the idea that we get our beliefs solely from our upbringing, from our friends and families, from our personal economic interests, and calling into question the notion that in politics, we can really change (most of us, anyway).
Abstract: Disputes between those holding differing political views are ubiquitous and deep-seated, and they often follow common,
recognizable lines. The supporters of tradition and stability, sometimes referred to as conservatives, do battle with the supporters of
innovation and reform, sometimes referred to as liberals. Understanding the correlates of those distinct political orientations is
probably a prerequisite for managing political disputes, which are a source of social conﬂict that can lead to frustration and even
bloodshed. A rapidly growing body of empirical evidence documents a multitude of ways in which liberals and conservatives differ
from each other in purviews of life with little direct connection to politics, from tastes in art to desire for closure and from disgust
sensitivity to the tendency to pursue new information, but the central theme of the differences is a matter of debate. In this article,
we argue that one organizing element of the many differences between liberals and conservatives is the nature of their physiological
and psychological responses to features of the environment that are negative. Compared with liberals, conservatives tend to register
greater physiological responses to such stimuli and also to devote more psychological resources to them. Operating from this point of
departure, we suggest approaches for reﬁning understanding of the broad relationship between political views and response to the
negative. We conclude with a discussion of normative implications, stressing that identifying differences across ideological groups is
not tantamount to declaring one ideology superior to another.
imho, the average liberal in my experience and on ATS . . . is brazenly and dangerously out of touch with reality so much as to be living in lala land
originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask
What's that say when society can't deal w you being a conservative so much that they have to do a study so they can say something's wrong w you.
Another division tactic
My god I don't want to live on this planet anymore
“There’s great overlap between religious beliefs and political orientations,” says one of the study authors, Jordan Peterson of University of Toronto’s department of psychology. “We found that religious individuals tend to be more conservative and spiritual people tend to be more liberal.
“Inducing a spiritual experience through a guided meditation exercise led both liberals and conservatives to endorse more liberal political attitudes.”