Brain Wiring Redux

[REASON]

Originally Posted by questor

Reason, you said ''These are ideologies primarily geared around value systems developed through personal experiences.'' How do you know this to be true?

Because people are not born with inherent value systems or idologies. They are learned.

Originally Posted by questor

We already have aptitude tests for numerous employment positions. Would you want a physics lab to hire someone who can't handle math? Would you hire a lifeguard that can't swim? Why are you hostile to the possibility my idea may have merit? Do you think there should be no aptitude assessment for the most important job in the world?

First of all, I'm nowhere near "hostile" about this. I know that conservative commontators like to always talk about how liberals are hostile angry people, and I know you have painted me with the liberal brush.

What I reject about your ideas is the base argument behind all of this that left-brained, or conservative, people are better suited to political leadership positions. I do not believe you are actually concerned about life guards or physicists. As you've stated, we already have aptitude tests for those types of positions. But of course, they're not based on brain orientation.

What you appear to actually be concerned about, particularly considering what you stated in the first few pages of the original Brain Wiring thread, is that the country is going to go to hell in a hand basket because there's a good chance that a "liberal" is going to be elected to the presidency. So you are here to suggest that that is a mistake because the liberal mind is not suited to the presidency because they are right-brained oriented, and would be better suited to artsy fartsy endeavors.

For you, I think this is all about your fear of what's going to happen if people of your chosen political persuasion are not perpetually in power. So you are chasing this theory to try and convince as many as possible that part of the aptitude that should be considered when choosing a president is whether he is sufficiently left-brain oriented, or conservative.

But here's the rub. Aptitude is not driven by a person's brain orientation. It is driven by their knowledge, skill, and experience. We cannot legitimately pigeon-hole people into career paths based on their developed brain orientation.

In a truly free society, people should be able to choose their own paths. And if they are capable of doing the job, they shouldn't be denied simply because some questionaire determined that they have the wrong brain orientation.

That's called discrimination.

[questor]

Modest, if you have followed this thread, I have posted numerous links that
speak to traits and thought patterns involved with hemispheric differences.
If you don't want to do any exploration of the subject yourself, why would you belabor the subject? Maybe you should read my first post which explains the basis for all this. Is it the position of the antagonists that all research that can be done on brain patterns has been completed and there will no more
information gathered? Is it possible that some day we will learn why liberals think the government should be responsible for a citizen's welfare and a conservative thinks a person should be responsible for himself?

[REASON]

Originally Posted by questor

Is it possible that some day we will learn why liberals think the government should be responsible for a citizen's welfare and a conservative thinks a person should be responsible for himself?

Really? I was under the impression that conservatives think the people (government) should be responsible for the welfare of corporations and banks.

Isn't that who we're subsidizing or bailing-out these days?

What type of brain orientation leads to that?

[modest]

Originally Posted by modest

Can you please point us to such a published article preferably with a link.

Thank you,

~modest

Originally Posted by questor

Modest, if you have followed this thread, I have posted numerous links that speak to traits and thought patterns involved with hemispheric differences. If you don't want to do any exploration of the ubject yourself, why would you belabor the subject?

Ok, I wasn't sure that's what you were talking about. All of your links except one are to the same site: Neuropolitics.org. Nothing on that site is published nor does it qualify as scientific research. I explained this in my previous post. It seems to be a kind of talking-points-hoax complete with rhetoric about homosexual liberals who are prone to mate outside their own race and pictures of the burning world trade center towers. The best it has in the way of research is an online quiz form that anyone can fill out.

I'm not sure if you actually do fail to understand the problem with this or if you just prefer not to admit it, but regardless, your statement: "numerous research articles already published" is inconsistent with the multiple links to that weird site.

Originally Posted by questor

Maybe you should read my first post which explains the basis for all this.

Your first post is one sentence long and doesn't explain anything. It does, however, have a link to a real media source:

Study finds liberal-conservative difference in brain functioning

Which talks about a Los Angeles times story found here:

Study finds left-wing brain, right-wing brain

Which talks about a study published in Nature Neuroscience. It doesn't name the study, but fortunately gives the name of the lead author: David Amodio of NYU. Looking him up, I found his website with a list of publications:

David Amodio

From this I deduced that the study you're refering to is titled: Neurocognitive correlates of liberalism and conservatism 2007. With the title and author, I was able to go to Google Scholar and search for the publication online. After trying four or five archives that required membership, I found one that was available free and online:

http://www.psych.nyu.edu/amodiolab/A...re%20Neuro.pdf

Which is what I was asking for when I said "Can you please point us to such a published article preferably with a link. Thank you, ~modest"

Now that I have the one published study that I believe you were talking about, I will look at it and see if it supports what you say:

Originally Posted by questor

Is it the position of the antagonists that all research that can be done on brain patterns has been completed and there will no more information gathered? Is it possible that some day we will learn why liberals think the government should be responsible for a citizen's welfare and a conservative thinks a person should be responsible for himself?

But that will have to be tomorrow because I'm very tired.

will get back to you...

~modest

[questor]

Reason, by your own words you are proving the point I have been making. Your brain and mine are wired differently. I am sure I could make no argument to convince you of the ultimate gain to society for '' bailing out'' financial institutions
which have such a large impact on our economy. You have arrived at your own opinion by viewing the distress of the markets and your solution is to what...?

[REASON]

Originally Posted by questor

Reason, by your own words you are proving the point I have been making. Your brain and mine are wired differently.

questor, of course our brains are wired differently. From the moment we were born, our brains have been developing neural connections, and throughout our lives, based on our experiences and the information that we have attained, each of our brains have formed unique thought patterns. There are so many processes at work in relating to emotions, influences, exposure, education, etc., that have contributed to our current "wiring" and brain orientation.

I am not here to tell you that we are all wired the same. What I have been arguing against is 1) That there is scientific evidence that can substantiate the claim that there are inherent genetic propensities toward political persuasion; 2) That there is any scientific evidence to support the idea that people that have a tendency to favor a particular hemisphere are better suited to government leadership positions, or to the contrary, less suited; and 3) That we as a society should entertain the idea of segregating the population by their brain orientation with the goal of steering them toward some particular career path.

Originally Posted by questor

I am sure I could make no argument to convince you of the ultimate gain to society for '' bailing out'' financial institutions which have such a large impact on our economy. You have arrived at your own opinion by viewing the distress of the markets and your solution is to what...?

What a huge assumption you have made here. What in my statement above gives you the impression that I find anything wrong with a decision to bail out financial institutions? If I'm such the liberal that thinks we should lean on the government for everything like you have been taught to believe, wouldn't it be consistent for me to believe that corporations and banks should lean on the government as well?

I'm simply pointing out the hypocrisy in a mindset that is abhorrent to government assistance unless it is tied to big buisiness. If individuals should be responsible for taking care of their own financial condition, why shouldn't banks and lending institutions be expected to do the same? Do you realize the types of investigations that are currently underway that are looking into instances of fraud in lending practices? Should our tax dollars be going toward providing relief for large financial institutions that may be suffering due to illegal business practices?


I arrive at my opinion based on what makes sense to me, and so often, I rely on science to help me in that regard because I think the process is credible. I'm sure you form your opinions on what makes sense to you as well, but I don't know what sources of information you find credible. But what makes sense to us is ultimately tied our understanding, our values, and what we believe is important. But we are not genetically predispositioned to values and beliefs. Those are gained through life experience. Hopefully, we are able to amend our values and beliefs if our experiences tell us that they are misguided. This is similar to the tenets of the scientific method, which I happen to find valuable. But so often, people become so ingrained in their thinking and are so desperate to prove they are right in their opinions that they will deny reality and evidence to the contrary in order to protect their beliefs.

Invariably, since everyone's life experiences and therefore "brain wiring" is unique, we can either focus on our differences and struggle endlessly to convince everyone to believe as we do, or we can accept our uniqueness and differences and seek to find common ground for the sake of all.

We have a choice.

[questor]

Reason. your quote:
'' I am not here to tell you that we are all wired the same. What I have been arguing against is 1) That there is scientific evidence that can substantiate the claim that there are inherent genetic propensities toward political persuasion; 2) That there is any scientific evidence to support the idea that people that have a tendency to favor a particular hemisphere are better suited to government leadership positions, or to the contrary, less suited; and 3) That we as a society should entertain the idea of segregating the population by their brain orientation with the goal of steering them toward some particular career path.''
My answers:
1. I have never said there is scientific evidence substantiating my theory. I have said that current research points in that direction. It will not be proved/
disproved until proper resarch is done.
2. In reading the published descriptions of hemispheric differences, you can decide for yourself which qualities are best for leadership.
3.I have never said a word about segregating the population by brain orientation or steering people against their will. You are misrepresenting and misunderstanding my words. Career aptitude tests have been in use for decades. Large businesses spend thousands of dollars engaging the services
of psychologists and professionals to suit an applicant to the job. What is wrong with hiring the best person for the job? The same holds true for politicians--we in effect hire a president for our country knowing very little about him. Does this make sense?

[questor]

One other point: is it not obvious to you that a great number of people embrace the liberal viewpoint or generally agree with each other on most liberal issues, and the same can be said for conservatives? Does this not beg the question how great numbers of people can believe in one set of ideas and a similar number believe the direct opposite?

[modest]

Originally Posted by modest

http://www.psych.nyu.edu/amodiolab/A...re%20Neuro.pdf

...Now that I have the one published study that I believe you were talking about, I will look at it and see if it supports what you say:

OK, alright, I read it cover to cover. All 2 pages - and I even looked at the graph

Rather than writing a big, long summary and critique I'll just say: this study had nothing to do with genetic predisposition toward political ideology or left brain / right brain tendencies. If you read it and want to discuss particulars I'll be around. Otherwise, I'll not get into what I thought of it.

~modest

[questor]

Modest, how do you interpret this paragraph from the study?
''Political scientists and psychologists have long noted differences in the
cognitive and motivational profiles of liberals and conservatives in the
USA and elsewhere. Across dozens of behavioral studies, conservatives
have been found to be more structured and persistent in their
judgments and approaches to decision-making, as indicated by higher
average scores on psychological measures of personal needs for order,
structure and closure1. Liberals, by contrast, report higher tolerance of
ambiguity and complexity, and greater openness to new experiences on
psychological measures. Given that these associations between political
orientation and cognitive styles have been shown to be heritable,
evident in early childhood, and relatively stable across the lifespan2,3,
we hypothesized that political orientation may be associated with
individual differences in a basic neurocognitive mechanism involved
broadly in self-regulation.''
What do these words suggest to you?