It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fear and anxiety drive conservatives' political attitudes

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:25 AM
link   
I think it is all backwards.

Conservatives protect democrats and progressives protect republicans and we can never pin either side down.

If you want real change then do it backwards.




posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:26 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

both serve a purpose though, without the progressives, there would be very little advance movement, without the conservatives, the progressives would take off with such a fast momentum that we'd lose part of our society and we could very well find ourselves in a mess we didn't anticipate. we need both, not at such odds with each other, but rather listening to each other and working together.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Never thought I'd see the day when something as simple as political ideology would be picked apart to be part of a psycological study.

Remember when Churchill got into power and quickly ousted after his job was done?
That's how politics should work, vote in the best guy woman, team or what ever for the appropriate situations until things cool down.
But no it's boiled down to tribal politics where one side just blames the other for every little thing and wants to dominate each other.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: introvert

You called ATS people all that study stuff, then used that to assert that the study was correct.



I said the OP's source is correct and ATS is a good example of that sort of thinking.



Check out some logical fallacy list(s), yo.
[


Which fallacy did I use?
edit on 12-3-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-3-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: introvert

both serve a purpose though, without the progressives, there would be very little advance movement, without the conservatives, the progressives would take off with such a fast momentum that we'd lose part of our society and we could very well find ourselves in a mess we didn't anticipate. we need both, not at such odds with each other, but rather listening to each other and working together.





I can agree with that. We definitely have to have a balance.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

No, we need them (RNC + DNC) to stop colluding to squash all other viewpoints. It's pretty ironic the left screams about breaking from "binary", yet are still every bit as quick to insist on binary logic, binary political power structure status quo, when it comes to partisansnip.
edit on 12-3-2018 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Everyone can see your quote on the previous page, but push on slush puppy.




posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: Painterz
Seriously, the mud pit just needs to go.

I get that it generates hits and comments. But the mud pit has single handedly wrecked ATS.


All of ATS is just one big mud pit; Insults, trolling and adolescent tough guy attitudes thru out.
There's also a negative side.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Allaroundyou
a reply to: Painterz Agreed, and I don't really have much to agree on with ya but this I def do. Why is there a section where some rules don't apply? It takes away from ATS. I believe we should start a petition. I joined just as you and the majority of others to discuss conspiracy not politics.




Aye mate, there's clearly many political issues you and I are never going to agree on. And that's fine, you know. It's a big world. We don't have to agree.

I just hate how ATS has become a playground where this poisonous political discourse and name calling has just taken over. It's hard to come to this site without a sinking feeling in my heart at what ugly discourse is going to play out today.

And it's lowered the tone across every board here. And there's no sign of it getting any better any time soon either.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

ever think that the military came up with that manual to protect our troops while they were in the ultra-conservative islamic country of afghanistan?? I mean, come one, they are so backwards they will throw acid in little girls faces if they try to go to school.... I don't know any liberals that are for honor killings... they certainly aren't any saying that it would be a great idea to make them legal in the US... has there been any honor killings here in the states where the murderer has gotten off on the basis of freedom of religion? do you think there is a chance in hades that one would ever be passed?
as far as the immigration issue from islamic countries.. it began to increase during the bush years, I do believe that entry into our country was being used as a way to convince those living in the arab world to assist us in our war efforts. you know that "crusade" that bush.... the "compassionate conservative" declared on the islamic world.
I find it kind of humorous that what you claim to be a racial war seems to be just a call to continue that crusade!

our constitution is designed to protect all religious views, all of our basic rights... as long as it stays intact, no religion can overpower another and force their way of life on others. the goes for the christian as well as the islamics. we are free to chose our beliefs!!



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: introvert

Everyone can see your quote on the previous page, but push on slush puppy.



Now that is a logical fallacy. It's called appeal to the majority and/or the "people's fallacy". It would be on the list of fallacies you mentioned.

Which fallacy, specifically, did I use?
edit on 12-3-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Painterz

Are you sure 'the rest of the site' isn't just a sign of the times society wide? It seems to me the mud pit gives people a chance to blow off steam, where otherwise we'd all be banned by now for talking directly to people when it's just oh so necessary sometimes.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

umm.... ya, don't remember obama labeling fox news as being the enemy, don't remember the liberals on ATS calling for the rounding up of all the conservatives and locking them up...
have you read the ATS boards here????



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

You didn't say the study is correct, and ats is a good example you called the people of ats the 'names' in the study, then concluded the study was correct (in that order). Then you just claimed you spouted it off the other way around, which I pointed out everyone can go and see it for themselves (as opposed to using everyone elses attitudes about what you said as evidence to support my position).

Of course I was just being a needle from the get, but push on, as always, slush puppy.




posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

umm.... ya, don't remember obama labeling fox news as being the enemy, don't remember the liberals on ATS calling for the rounding up of all the conservatives and locking them up...
have you read the ATS boards here????



Don't forget the calls for the media to be punished for using their constitutional rights.

In many ways, conservatism is the antithesis of freedom.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:50 AM
link   

In a 2012 study, liberal and conservative participants were shown collages of both negative and positive images on a computer screen while their eye movements were recorded. While liberals were quicker to look at pleasant images, like a happy child or a cute bunny rabbit, conservatives tended to behave oppositely. They’d first inspect threatening and disturbing pictures—things like car wrecks, spiders on faces, and open wounds crawling with maggots—and would also tend to dwell on them for longer. This is what psychologists call a “negativity bias”.


This would be what non-psychologists would call "common sense."

If I'm between a pretty butterfly and an alligator, guess which one gets my attention? The people that would focus on the butterfly are the ones likely to be eliminated from the gene pool.



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: introvert

You didn't say the study is correct, and ats is a good example you called the people of ats the 'names' in the study, then concluded the study was correct (in that order). Then you just claimed you spouted it off the other way around, which I pointed out everyone can go and see it for themselves (as opposed to using everyone elses attitudes about what you said as evidence to support my position).

Of course I was just being a needle from the get, but push on, as always, slush puppy.



Ok. So which fallacy was used?

So far, it appears that you are the one relying on fallacies. As you just used another one.

And when you say you are being a needle, does that mean you are just arguing for the sake of argument?



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

In a 2012 study, liberal and conservative participants were shown collages of both negative and positive images on a computer screen while their eye movements were recorded. While liberals were quicker to look at pleasant images, like a happy child or a cute bunny rabbit, conservatives tended to behave oppositely. They’d first inspect threatening and disturbing pictures—things like car wrecks, spiders on faces, and open wounds crawling with maggots—and would also tend to dwell on them for longer. This is what psychologists call a “negativity bias”.


This would be what non-psychologists would call "common sense."

If I'm between a pretty butterfly and an alligator, guess which one gets my attention? The people that would focus on the butterfly are the ones likely to be eliminated from the gene pool.


In this case I think the argument is that conservatives see "alligators" where they may not even exist.
edit on 12-3-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Business as usual, although increasingly supremacist.

They do that sort of thing all the time in WWF (WWE), then go out together to the strip club and snort...

See how the Two Party's collude to stomp put all "third party" competitors here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


edit on 12-3-2018 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2018 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom

In a 2012 study, liberal and conservative participants were shown collages of both negative and positive images on a computer screen while their eye movements were recorded. While liberals were quicker to look at pleasant images, like a happy child or a cute bunny rabbit, conservatives tended to behave oppositely. They’d first inspect threatening and disturbing pictures—things like car wrecks, spiders on faces, and open wounds crawling with maggots—and would also tend to dwell on them for longer. This is what psychologists call a “negativity bias”.


This would be what non-psychologists would call "common sense."

If I'm between a pretty butterfly and an alligator, guess which one gets my attention? The people that would focus on the butterfly are the ones likely to be eliminated from the gene pool.




The world is all rainbows, unicorns and puppydogs, to some....


And when it's not they have therapy dogs brought in to cheer them up.





top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join