Brain Wiring Redux

[REASON]

Originally Posted by questor

Reason, let me say this to you. If certain traits are necessary or beneficial for a national office holder, and these traits can be determined, I think this has value.

If somehow, it were objectively determined what the traits are that would be "necessary or beneficial for a national office holder," would you support establishing a law that would restrict national office holding postitions to those who were deemed to possess those traits?

In your opinion, what are some examples of the kind of traits you're talking about?

Originally Posted by questor

There are people who have no business holding public office who have unfortunately been elected because of public ignorance. There are people in office now who are injurious to our social and economic systems.

And international relations, I might add.

I agree with this 100%.

Originally Posted by questor

You can believe what you wish, but I see no value for either of us to continue the badinage unless you have some information or research negating my opinion.

Well of course, we can all believe what we wish (currently).

But do you really think your opinion can be negated, even with overwhelming scientific evidence? Would you consider yourself *flexible* when it comes to your opinions?

I'm simply attempting to get a sense of your hemispheric brain orientation.

[Overdog]

Originally Posted by questor

Reason, let me say this to you. If certain traits are necessary or beneficial for a national office holder, and these traits can be determined, I think this has value. There are people who have no business holding public office who have unfortunately been elected because of public ignorance. There are people in office now who are injurious to our social and economic systems. You can believe what you wish, but I see no value for either of us to continue
the badinage unless you have some information or research negating my opinion.

I'm not a religous person, but I thank god that those ignorant voters haven't elected someone with your vision into office.

Do you not realize that the kind of thinking you are advocating has led to some of the most egregious horrors in human history?

Edit:

Let me give you a clue...

Fascism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Zythryn]

Originally Posted by questor

Reason, let me say this to you. If certain traits are necessary or beneficial for a national office holder, and these traits can be determined, I think this has value. There are people who have no business holding public office who have unfortunately been elected because of public ignorance. ...

Finally!
OK, Questor, can you give us some examples of these traits?
From your original post, would I be correct in assuming that you feel these traits lie solely with those of a conservative or liberal political view?

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by Overdog

I'm not a religous person, but I thank god that those ignorant voters haven't elected someone with your vision into office.

Do you not realize that the kind of thinking you are advocating has led to some of the most egregious horrors in human history?

Edit:

Let me give you a clue...

Fascism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think all this is far to simplistic, there are far more than two groups in the way people think. Some people want to think for themselves. Others want to believe all the thinking has already been done. In these two groups you have people who feel strongly they need to tell others what to think. Then you have the rest of the people looking to be told what to think. I am sure there are many more sub groups and you can apply the labels of left and right to which ever group you want but it still comes down to these two top groups. For me I think for myself and don't really give a rats ass what others think until they intrude on my own freedom to think and do what I want. This of course behooves me to support those who support freedom of thought and action, of course in my view this doesn't include the average right wing neoconservative, on the other hand I do not blindly support left wing liberals either. It's called the middle ground and I think there are far more people in the middle than on either side of this "great divide"

[Overdog]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

I think all this is far to simplistic, there are far more than two groups in the way people think. Some people want to think for themselves. Others want to believe all the thinking has already been done. In these two groups you have people who feel strongly they need to tell others what to think. Then you have the rest of the people looking to be told what to think. I am sure there are many more sub groups and you can apply the labels of left and right to which ever group you want but it still comes down to these two top groups. For me I think for myself and don't really give a rats ass what others think until they intrude on my own freedom to think and do what I want. This of course behooves me to support those who support freedom of thought and action, of course in my view this doesn't include the average right wing neoconservative, on the other hand I do not blindly support left wing liberals either. It's called the middle ground and I think there are far more people in the middle than on either side of this "great divide"

I see your point, Moontanman, and don't disagree with it. But questor is advocating a political ideology here. One that says your child can't be president simply because he/she is left or right brained. Once we go down that road, where does it stop? It is Fascism, plain and simple. I would die fighting against it, as many already have, if it ever comes to that.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by Overdog

I see your point, Moontanman, and don't disagree with it. But questor is advocating a political ideology here. One that says your child can't be president simply because he/she is left or right brained. Once we go down that road, where does it stop? It is Fascism, plain and simple. I would die fighting against it, as many already have, if it ever comes to that.

Oh I agree whole heartedly, if I was forced to choose between liberal and conservative I would have to choose Liberal. I don't agree with all liberal policies but at least the liberals are less likely to want to round up people like me and put us in camps.

[modest]

Originally Posted by Overdog

But questor is advocating a political ideology here. One that says your child can't be president simply because he/she is left or right brained. Once we go down that road, where does it stop? It is Fascism, plain and simple. I would die fighting against it, as many already have, if it ever comes to that.

Yup Overdog, that is indeed what qustor is saying and I can see how you would be concerned where that thinking leads. As you probably were not around during the previous discussion on this topic I'd recommend checking out the first few posts of questor's old brain wiring thread.

Questor starts by envisioning a time when a brain scan would reveal that a potential president is conservative enough for office.

Questor,

This might be a good time to point out that arguing from an agenda has colored and biased all the good science that has been offered in these threads.

The scientific research on left brain / right brain character traits is very interesting. Also, the genetic component to ideology which is explored in the twin study I linked a few posts ago is very good reading and worthy of scientific discussion. This however is very difficult to accomplish on hypography because you dominate this issue with a clear and obvious agenda.

Your attempts to skew this research doesn't just hurt this thread, it hurts your argument. Notice what Overdog said when he realized your bias.

~modest

[questor]

When I was asked to clarify my position I did so i post #35:
Re: Brain Wiring Redux

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Zythryn, thanks for your polite questions. Here are the answers:
''Is your supposition that this 'brain wiring' you refer to set at birth, or by experience? If both, about what percentage (rough guess of course).''
The genetic framework for neural wiring is set at birth. As it matures, thought processes may cause some new anastomoses with existing neurons and environmental occurrences may alter and/or add to thought perception.
But, as the individual matures, he tends to favor one hemisphere over the other. ( 40% of the voting public are liberal, 40% conservative--rough guess)
''Even if this were true, why should a 'test' be applied to people running for office? Can we not tell based on their platform? This point may deserve a thread of its own.''
As we currently elect our politicians, we know very little about how they would conduct the business of the people. Take Obama--what will he do about taxes? welfare? Iraq? Racial questions? The economy? Are we to be socialists or capitalists? Shouldn't people know? Platforms change and politicians lie. They do not keep their promises. Do you have a better way to
determine suitability for the job?
''Are you aware the definitions of liberal and conservative have changed many times in history?''
I am only concerned about the current situation.
''Finally, I don't think you can label most people as one or the other. Most have aspects of both. For example, I don't think you could label me either one (take your best shot though).''
I agree there is crossover, but the situation is true for millions. Why did 50 million people vote for Kerry and 50 million vote for Bush in the last election?
From my simple statement above we are now into passing laws and rounding up people for jail I assume. This thinking ensues from an inability to process the printed word intellectually. This inability for sequential thinking is one of the traits I will discuss in another political thread.

[REASON]

Originally Posted by questor

From my simple statement above we are now into passing laws and rounding up people for jail I assume. This thinking ensues from an inability to process the printed word intellectually. This inability for sequential thinking is one of the traits I will discuss in another political thread.

Since we are so inept in our ability to intelligently process the printed word sequentially, why don't you assist our inferior brain chemistry and explain what you meant when you said:

Originally Posted by questor

I would suggest they immediately call in a conservative psychiatrist to see if he could straighten the kid out before he runs for president.

Secondly, I didn't accuse you of favoring any laws, I asked you if you would. You have yet to answer it so I will politely ask it again.

If somehow, it were objectively determined what the traits are that would be "necessary or beneficial for a national office holder," would you support establishing a law that would restrict national office holding postitions to those who were deemed to possess those traits?

In your opinion, what are some examples of the kind of traits you're talking about?

[Zythryn]

Originally Posted by Zythryn

Finally!
OK, Questor, can you give us some examples of these traits?
From your original post, would I be correct in assuming that you feel these traits lie solely with those of a conservative or liberal political view?

I am still interested in Questor's vision of what those traits are.