Red Brain, Blue Brain: Republicans and Democrats Process Risk Differently, Research Finds

page: 2
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 06:21 PM
link   
What about the brains of those who would/do vote independently


I wonder if it shows a distinct pattern deviation from these "blue" and "red" brains.




posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hopechest
Considering how many blathering idiots are in the democratic party I think its safe to assume that over half of them are actually conservatives pretending to be liberal then.

Very interesting indeed!


You see just how interesting this is and I'll bet you are right.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11235813213455
So blue brains have a tendency to group think and have a lack of inidividuality.... Makes sense


Group think is another phenomenon entirely. Blue brains, as you put it, think in terms of their place in a greater whole rather then their place alone without regard to the world around them.
edit on 14-2-2013 by FyreByrd because: spelling



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by capone1
Bullcrap. So my politically "independant" brain must be a dark orange.
We need to stop picking sides.


edit on 14-2-2013 by capone1 because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-2-2013 by capone1 because: (no reason given)


This is not about sides at all. It is about a specific spectrum of ideology named conveniently Conservative to Liberal. We all are at different places on the spectrum at different times and on different issues and, I would hope, all votely our consciences independately and not as we are told.

It is merely a study on predicting tendencies towards one of the ends of the spectrum by how one's brain actually works.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by FyreByrd
 


The interesting thing is that republicans and democrats did not differ in their actual risk taking. This implies that they share the or close to the same level of intelligence.

Which sectors of the brain they activated describes aspects of their personality. Apparently, democrats have more empathy while republicans are more self-centered.

The reason that I said that the fact they share equal or close to equal levels of intelligence is interesting is because it's been proven that libertarians have higher IQs than both. And I'm a libertarian



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by tallcool1

Originally posted by xedocodex
reply to post by FyreByrd
 



You could infer from this that the cognitive styles of conversatives diifer from liberals in that self-centered fear motivates the conservative (red) folk


Which would explain why they love guns so much...they live life in a state of fear.


So, if I own guns that means I'm a republican who is afraid of everything? Interesting, but idiotic assesment.


No. It means that many people who are traditionally Republican have fearful impulses which explains why they "cling" to their weapons.

You're making an improper logical error: people who are like X do Y, does not imply that people who do Y are necessarily all people who are like X. Other people may like weapons for other reasons.


I own guns. I am a libertarian (if I have to choose one). And I'm not afraid of anything.


It's very possible that the "fear" in question is not self-awareness but low-level unconscious neurological processes. The linguistic brain often lies or is ignorant about what the unconscious brain is doing.


Besides, these kind of posts are realistically just the insane rantings of liberals who are so afraid of conservatives that they need to make these "go get the bad guy republican" posts.


It does happen to be backed by some scientifically obtained measurements. And yes, it is reasonable to be afraid of people who are aggressively fearful and love weapons, and annoyed when they are selfish by nature.



Please take the blinders off. Democrats and Republicans are the same totalitarian beast nowadays. They say what their "side" wants to hear and then when in office, do the same exact thing as their predecessor i.e. Obama and Bush. Same exact agenda - only Obama is doing it faster because Bush coudn't claim "racism" to his critics and then just push the agenda through anyway.


There is a difference in their agendas in some area, but not in others (e.g. a fondness for excessive domestic surveillance).

Notice how little the conservatives, in the mainstream, have been seriously protesting the surveillance state, but when there is talk of mild gun regulation they go nuts. Maybe not here, where there are strong libertarian tendencies, but in national political discourse. How many politicians are seriously running on "end the Bush/Obama surveillance state" in public vs "hands off my assault weapons"? It's about zero to thousands.

Lots of defenders of the 2nd Amendment, and none for the 4th. There are no to minor violations of the 2nd, and enormous violations of the 4th, but nobody cares. The supposed "Constitutionalists", except who are termed a 'wacko fringe', somehow are silent.

Why?

Because it can be explained by the same hypothesis: the fearful ones really like the surveillance state because they think it is protecting them against The Other, just like their guns.

Throughout history, conservatives of the day have bitterly fought the liberals of the day in the name of upholding principles of dead liberals.

In a new development, conservatives dislike scientific results and personally attack the motives of the scientists.

edit on 14-2-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-2-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-2-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-2-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-2-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   
To me this infers that democrats are easy to control and manipulate, as long as something is "popular" they will accept anything regardless of risk. It only further supports my belief that democracy, communism, socialism and all other majority ruled systems are dangerous and will lead to our eventual extinction.

It's pure arrogance and naivete to state survival instincts are no longer needed in the current or future times, that this thought process is "evolution" and better. Though the reliance on those instincts as part of the republican thought process is just as bad and just as easy to manipulate with fear instead of social acceptance, but as it seems from what i have observed is that both sides are affected by both things equally, so i think the result of this study is skewed to favor democrat opinion.
edit on 14-2-2013 by namehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by namehere
 


The Germans thought Nazism was "evolution" also.

History simply repeats itself. Liberals are today's Germans.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
How come all 4 professional gamblers I know are registered republicans? Same with the 2 nascar drivers I've met.


Risk takers????



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 07:13 PM
link   
82 people? Really? Is that a suitable sample from which to be extrapolating those kinds of sweeping generalizations?


edit on 14-2-2013 by AwakeinNM because: mo betta gramma



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by FyreByrd

Originally posted by 11235813213455
So blue brains have a tendency to group think and have a lack of inidividuality.... Makes sense


Group think is another phenomenon entirely. Blue brains, as you put it, think in terms of their place in a greater whole rather then their place alone without regard to the world around them.
edit on 14-2-2013 by FyreByrd because: spelling


Exactly...they "know their place" No individualisim.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by namehere
To me this infers that democrats are easy to control and manipulate, as long as something is "popular" they will accept anything regardless of risk. It only further supports my belief that democracy, communism, socialism and all other majority ruled systems are dangerous and will lead to our eventual extinction.

It's pure arrogance and naivete to state survival instincts are no longer needed in the current or future times, that this thought process is "evolution" and better. Though the reliance on those instincts as part of the republican thought process is just as bad and just as easy to manipulate with fear instead of social acceptance, but as it seems from what i have observed is that both sides are affected by both things equally, so i think the result of this study is skewed to favor democrat opinion.
edit on 14-2-2013 by namehere because: (no reason given)


I don't agree but do conced that you could infer that if you believe that "social and self awaress" is somehow related to popularity and I do not. In my experience those who tend towards what is popular are not 'aware' of their motivations nor likely to consider any social ramifications of that tendency.

I never stated, nor does the studies author, that survival instincts are no longer needed. What I infer from my reading of the work is that our suvival instrincts are, in fact, envolving into a more holistic and altrusitic form and away from the reptilian form of fight/flight.

The idea that we don't need survival instincts is as ludicrus as the idea that millenia old instincts serve us well in present society.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by FyreByrdYou could infer from this that the cognitive styles of conversatives diifer from liberals in that self-centered fear motivates the conservative (red) folk while liberals (blue) folk tend to a more society centered approach to decisionmaking.


self centered fear? so Republicans think "how is this going to harm me?" which is why they like national security and guns. While Democrats are "society centered" which means they think to themselves "how are you/they going to harm me?" which is why the Democrats want to control everything and limit everyone



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11235813213455

Originally posted by FyreByrd

Originally posted by 11235813213455
So blue brains have a tendency to group think and have a lack of inidividuality.... Makes sense


Group think is another phenomenon entirely. Blue brains, as you put it, think in terms of their place in a greater whole rather then their place alone without regard to the world around them.
edit on 14-2-2013 by FyreByrd because: spelling


Exactly...they "know their place" No individualisim.


You can be an individual and still part of a group. All of us perform this trick everyday, in many different ways.

The idea that you will lose yourself if you are connected with others and the world is silly and is one of the ways that one's self-ish ego purpetuates it'self.

I think you are afraid of becoming a drone, as in a hive, and are afriad of losing yourself. My limited group/psychic type experiences (we don't really have terms for this) show how false and misleading that limited idea of connection is.

Have you ever experienced FLOW or a PEAK EXPERIENCE? Most likely playing sports with others, or music or another group indeavor. An experience that was easy wherein you were at your best, clear minded but plugged into something greater and you received from this 'greater' and it cycled into your performance? Maybe it was a time that you did something - a presentation or speech or a simple walk, where you stepped out of time and became more? There is no loss of self involved, in fact I would argue that you true self was exposed and made more by it. That's the type of group conscienceness that we are evolving towards. It's not a loss of self but an enhanced self - enhanced by all we open ourselves to. And it is fear that keeps this truth from our awareness.

But all that is off the core topic. Which is simply that blue brains and red brains function and perceive the world differently.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Oh sweet raptor baby Jesus you can smell the liberal propaganda off this one a mile away.

reply to post by FyreByrd
 



But all that is off the core topic. Which is simply that blue brains and red brains function and perceive the world differently.


I question your intent entirely when you throw in the......


Evolutionarily speaking, all this research would support the idea that liberals are at the forefront and conservatives are hold overs from an evolutionary stage that no longer serves humanity as we go into the future.


edit on 14-2-2013 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by mbkennel
 





Throughout history, conservatives of the day have bitterly fought the liberals of the day in the name of upholding principles of dead liberals.


Ah, that is very true. I find it telling how quickly this thread devolved into nothing more than the usual political sniping I so loathe. People proclaim to be different and yet act the same as everyone else. All new ideas were "liberal" at some point. People fear change, I guess I'm different in that I tend to think it's inevitable. It's better to accept change will happen and work for the best you can get for everyone.

I think there is some merit in the idea different ideological strains have different thought processes. The problem is people are aiming to be superior. It's the old human trap isn't it? You just have to be better than them because they are the enemy. They are different. Well, sometimes it's difficult to see when you are stuck on yourself. What is on display in this thread the stunning inability to accept that other people can have a different point of view and not be bad people. There is some merit in being a self-centered survivalist and there is merit in being able to give up things for the betterment of all.

It's also rather hilarious to see people accuse others of group-think while engaging in it themselves.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by tovenar

How come all 4 professional gamblers I know are registered republicans? Same with the 2 nascar drivers I've met.


Risk takers????


you should read the article - it is how they think about risks that differs - not whether or not they take trisks:


These results suggest that liberals and conservatives engage different cognitive processes when they think about risk.


your anecdotal experience is actually supported by the study!



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by tovenar
 


Those behaviors have more to do with impulse control. These are uncalculated risks you are discussing and it's not what the study is referencing. We are not talking about the impulse to take risk rather how one approaches it.

Ex: The conservative would think "Will this hurt me"?
The liberal "Will this hurt us"?
See the difference there? Has nothing to do with impulsive behavior.

And in my case it is generally "Need more data" lol



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by BobbyTarass
 


Throw a percentage sign on something and all of the sudden it's fact. I highly recommend that everyone take a statistics course once in their life. It will give you a whole new perspective when reading articles like this. Without running the numbers, I can almost completely assure you there's no way they got a statistically significant result from that sample size. There is no science in that study.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide

I question your intent entirely when you throw in the......


Evolutionarily speaking, all this research would support the idea that liberals are at the forefront and conservatives are hold overs from an evolutionary stage that no longer serves humanity as we go into the future.


edit on 14-2-2013 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)


Why question it, when it is obvious. My analysis of the facts may differ then yours.





new topics
top topics
 
20
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join