Brain Wiring Redux

[questor]

Glad you have a sense of humor. Save this so you can see the old right hemisphere in action.

[CraigD]

If I may offer you some advice, Questor, I’d stop placing so much focus on terms like “left/right brain, brained, brainer, etc.”. To an audience with at least a basic understanding of neurology and neuroanotomy, these terms suggest the sort of “pseudoscientific exaggeration of the research” described in the wikipedia article “lateralization of brain function”:

Hines (1987) states that the research on brain lateralization is valid as a research program, though commercial promoters have applied it to promote subjects and products far out of the implications of the research. For example, the implications of the research have no bearing on psychological interventions such as EMDR and neurolinguistic programming (Drenth 2003:53), brain training equipment, or management training. One explanation for why research on lateralization is so prone to exaggeration and false application is that the left-right brain dichotomy is an easy-to-understand notion, which can be oversimplified and misused for promotion in the guise of science. The research on lateralization of brain functioning is ongoing, and its implications are always tightly delineated, whereas the pseudoscientific applications are exaggerated, and applied to an extremely wide range of situations.

To summaries the general scientific consensus, much of which has been discussed in this and your previous “brain wiring” thread, the localization of brain function is much more complicated, and varies between individuals more greatly, than can be well described by simple left/right brain categorization. Essentially no human behavior, from emotional outburst to dispassionate exercise of math, occur in a single region or hemisphere of the cerebrum, or only in the cerebrum, so simple “this is done there” mappings are overly simplistic and wrong.

Your proposal seems to me simply the idea that objective scientific tests of brain function might provide a valuable tool in evaluating the suitability of people for various jobs, in particular public office. This is certainly not an unreasonable idea, and not at all unprecedented: it is one of the central planks the Natural Law Party, a multi-national collection of political parties that have included such famous people as late spiritual leader Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, physicist, 3-time US presidential candidate, and, according to many, (myself included) terrible pseudoscientist John Hagelin, and late musician George Harrison.

The failure of Natural Law Party candidates to gain more than a fraction of a percent of state or nation-wide votes in any election (though Hagelin, it should be noted, received nearly 24% of the US presidential vote in his home county in 1992), and the disbandment of most or all of these parties in recent years, should, I think, serve as a caution sign of the difficulty of promoting your position. You’d do well, I think, to study and understand these political movements, and the reasons for their apparent failure.

[questor]

Zythryn, the original post was closed and moved under the agreement that everything had been discussed. Everyone had their say, and you are now asking me to restate what is already available in the posts. I would like to know what your specific interest is in this subject, is it to argue incessantly about what has already been argued or to pursue further research information? There is such a thing as wasting time.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by questor

Zythryn, the original post was closed and moved under the agreement that everything had been discussed. Everyone had their say, and you are now asking me to restate what is already available in the posts. I would like to know what your specific interest is in this subject, is it to argue incessantly about what has already been argued or to pursue further research information? There is such a thing as wasting time.

Originally Posted by InfiniteNow

Since this thread has offered zero new evidence in favor of the proposal being made, and since questor refuses to address the questions posed to him, I move that this thread also be closed, as it's no different from the other one which already was.

All in favor, say "Aye."

Originally Posted by Overdog

Aye

Aye.

[REASON]

Aye!

[questor]

Craig, I agree with most of what you say. Throughout the two threads I have repeatedly stated I am only speaking from personal observation colored by some current research being done on the subject. I have never described my ideas as science, but I think that someday the research will show differing, imbedded thought patterns that separate people into opposing groups. The philosophy of life and governance and personal accountability
differs and affects our current lives and the future. That difference is obvious today and is inimical to our society. Why is it so?

[questor]

Craig, here are two of my original ''Brain Wiring'' posts explaining my thoughts.
post#47, post # 54
I looked at the Natural Law Party information and it was ripe for failure from the start. The religious part didn't help and since they were part liberal and part conservative,they alienated both groups of the people right out of the box. There are better ways to approach this dichotomy in thinking.

[Zythryn]

Questor,

I have yet to get an answer from you to this specific question:
What specific traits do you feel describe a liberal canidate and what specific traits do you feel describe a conservative canidate.
No where in either of your threads have a seen an answer to that simple question. You have posted links, given vague answers and such, but nothing specific.
Please, for my own clarification, just list the traits you see as 'liberal' or 'conservative'. If I have missed this, please give me a post number and thread.
If you can't answer this, I would also suggest closing the thread due to refusal to provide information about your own stance, limiting the ability to discuss your idea.

Edit: I see you posted the numbers as I was posting. Thank you for that part (link to #47 in old thread: http://hypography.com/forums/strange...tml#post199579).
However, I don't see how you got from those observations to tests for specific traits, liberal or conservative. Did I read something into your posts I should not have?

[REASON]

Originally Posted by Zythryn

Questor,

I have yet to get an answer from you to this specific question:
What specific traits do you feel describe a liberal canidate and what specific traits do you feel describe a conservative canidate.
No where in either of your threads have a seen an answer to that simple question. You have posted links, given vague answers and such, but nothing specific.
Please, for my own clarification, just list the traits you see as 'liberal' or 'conservative'.

Yes. I can't wait to see that as well.

[modest]

I'm waiting on that as well and I don't mean to change the subject.

But, was there a study that tries to tie favored brain hemisphere to political ideology? I ask because there would be a rather large leap in logic otherwise. Saying ideology is genetic (which there is a study implying) and saying left/right brain has associated traits doesn't equal left/right brain ideology. Unless I've missed something, questor is bringing together two concepts that are yet to be related.

So: is there any source demonstrating that favored brain hemisphere has an associated favored political ideology, questor?

~modest