[questor]

I am not conversant with your problems down under, but there are good and bad people of all persuasions. When found out, they should be prevented from
impacting other peoples lives. My basic theory is this:
Right brain thinkers occupy the liberal wing of politics. some are benign, some are violent activists. They have difficulty understanding cause and effect, they may be able to describe a problem, but can't understand the proper way to solve it. This has caused our educational system to be a dismal failure, since we have to dumb down the curriculi to comply with the slower students. The US welfare system was a dismal failure for the same reason, so was affirmative action. They do not understand that forcing a productive worker to support a non-productive person is beneficial to neither. They are non-judgemental, meaning that no one gets criticized for bad behavior. This, of course, leads to more bad behavior. They are unable to understand the societal value of religion or a ''higher authority'', so they each make up their own set of morals which allow them to do ''whatever feels good'' at the time.
This has led to a coarsening and degradation of our society is taking place.
Compare our movies, TV shows, music, art of today with that of 20 years ago.
Liberals are mainly interested in themselves, although they claim to be acting for others. Witness the war in Iraq where they claim to support the troops while cutting off the funds needed to supply them. Which liberal has shown support by visiting hospitals, fund raising for wounded vets and their families
or any evidence of help whatsoever?
These are the people that want to lead our country, they do not understand
business procedures, they have no moral base, and cannot understand cause and effect. There only desire is to have power over their fellow man and they are not morally or mentally fit to be our leaders.

[charles brough]

Instead of Left Brain and Right brain, perhaps the difference between the Parties is that most Democrats are people who are or sympathize with the poor and working class while Republicans worry about protecting the economic system and hence their position in it.

The political debates are so emotional and so consistently on TV news because we are social primates instinctively motivated to take sides and feel enmity toward the other side or group. The media plays on this and turns it into an unending sports event. The result is the humiliating and demeaning of the candidates, putting them up as a circus, for their media spectacular. No wonder we get such insincere people elected and, as a result, come to hate politicians. We get what we deserve.

How can people see the same subject from extreme opposite perspectives? When you consider how divided, confused and complex our society is, it is a wonder there are only two sides! As in some other countries, there could be dozens of them!

[questor]

Charles Brough, you said:
''Instead of Left Brain and Right brain, perhaps the difference between the Parties is that most Democrats are people who are or sympathize with the poor and working class while Republicans worry about protecting the economic system and hence their position in it.''
This is a typically ridiculous staement by a right brain thinker. The Democrat initiatives frequently make worse the problems they try to solve, e.g. Welfare, Affirmative action, American education, the economy. If the American economic system goes bust, how will the poor be helped? Have you ever been hired for a job by a poor person? How do higher taxes help the economy? This is the type thinking our liberal leaders have and facts and evidence seem to be beyond their ability to fathom.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by questor

This is a typically ridiculous staement by a right brain thinker. The Democrat initiatives frequently make worse the problems they try to solve, e.g. Welfare, Affirmative action, American education, the economy.

What's ridiculous is this whole thread's attempt to split and categorize people, their priorities, and their political affiliations solely on assumed and unsubstantiated hemispherical dominance.

[questor]

Perhaps you disagree that there are two (or more) almost diametrically opposed political/social/philosophical groups in our country today. This deduction would fly in the face of the political shenanigans evident in every newspaper published. You may be interested in this article:

''Right Brain and Left Brain Inventory

An inventory of the different ways the right brain and left brain process information.



While we have a natural tendency towards one way of thinking, the two sides of our brain work together in our everyday lives. The right brain of the brain focuses on the visual, and processes information in an intuitive and simultaneous way, looking first at the whole picture then the details. The focus of the left brain is verbal, processing information in an analytical and sequential way, looking first at the pieces then putting them together to get the whole.

The bullet describes right brain, the# describes left brain.
Right Brain Inventory Left Brain Inventory
• Visual, focusing on images, patterns # Verbal, focusing on words, symbols, numbers
• Intuitive, led by feelings # Analytical, led by logic
• Process ideas simultaneously # Process ideas sequentially, step by step
• 'Mind photos' used to remember things, writing things down or illustrating them helps you remember Words used to remember things, remember names rather than faces
• Make lateral connections from information # Make logical deductions from information
• See the whole first, then the details # Work up to the whole step by step, focusing on details, information organised
• Organisation ends to be lacking # Highly organised
• Free association # Like making lists and planning
• Like to know why you're doing something or why rules exist (reasons) #Likely to follow rules without questioning them
• No sense of time # Good at keeping track of time
• May have trouble with spelling and finding words to express yourself # Spelling and mathematical formula easily memorised
• Enjoy touching and feeling actual objects (sensory input) # Enjoy observing
• Trouble prioritising, so often late, impulsive # Plan ahead
• Unlikely to read instruction manual before trying # Likely read an instruction manual before trying
• Listen to how something is being said
# Listen to what is being said
• Talk with your hands
# Rarely use gestures when talking
• Likely to think you're naturally creative, but need to apply yourself to develop your potential
# Likely to believe you're not creative, need to be willing to try and take risks to develop your potential

In Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain Betty Edwards quotes psychologist David Galin's favourite example of how we use our right brain when something becomes too difficult to describe something verbally: "Try to describe a spiral staircase without making a spiral gesture.'' ''

There have also been articles recently published by faculty at Emory U. and
the U. of Iowa as to differences in response when people react to politicians' names. Since the brain is the residence for thought, emotion, and rationality, it can only be assumed that these differences in perception come from differing brain patterns. In looking at the above characteristics, I would much prefer a left brain person as president.

[Buffy]

Originally Posted by questor

Perhaps you disagree that there are two (or more) almost diametrically opposed political/social/philosophical groups in our country today. This deduction would fly in the face of the political shenanigans evident in every newspaper published.

Polarization has become a popular political technique of some strategists.

It is certainly true that there are extremists at both ends who can't stand the other.

But polls consistently show a majority agree with a variation of the statement "a pox on both their houses."

The truth is the greatest enemy of the State,
Buffy

[questor]

Buffy, I think this exists far more than at the extreme ends of both poles, although one could ask what is wrong with the wiring of those polar extremists. The ''pox'' that a great number of people are calling for is because neither side is satisfied with how his/her interests are being served. If you happen to be a conservative, entertain yourself by going up to any liberal and ask ''What do you think of George Bush?''. Be sure you have on your earmuffs, because you'll surely get a hearty dose of vitriol. The answer will be ''He lied to us!'',
''There are no WMD'S!, and he started an illegal war!'' This is what about 40% of the country believes. The other half believes a vicious dictator was deposed, we are trying to bring Democracy to the Middle East and protect global interests in oil production and eliminate terrorism. These opposite views were caused by the same set of circumstances, so it's obvious there is a difference in the reasoning apparatus between these two camps. I think the gulf between the views of Americans is widening every day because of the
''different wiring'' and it is more difficult to reach consensus on issues which is
needed to bring bipartisanship and progress.

[CraigD]

For many reasons, I don’t believe that membership in a political party correlates strongly with detectable brain features, including the lateralization of brain function (“left or right brained-ness”).

One is that, as the linked wikipedia article summarizes, brain lateralization correlates only weakly to the traits commonly assigned to it by popular psychology authors and enthusiasts. The determination of it by means other than brain imaging or selective anesthesia, when performed by anyone I’ve ever witnessed attempting to do so, appear to me to be so prone to observer bias as to be worse than worthless. My anecdotal experience is that, when interviewed in circumstances such as by social work graduate students who have employed me as a statistician, I’m always determined to be strongly left-brained. When interviewed by social work graduate students who I meet during activities such as singing and playing in a coffee house, I’m always determine to be strongly right-brained.

Another is that, within my professional cohort of computer programmers and managers, I find right-wing political views to be more common among the presumably more language-oriented, right-brained managers than among the presumably more left-brained programmers and technicians, which, if I understand HBond’s argument correctly, is the precise opposite of what he predicts.

Note that I’m not here presenting more than anecdotal evidence. HBond, if you have some data supporting your claim, substantiated by reliable determinations of brain lateralization, please post it. Without evidence, I’m more strongly convinced of my own conclusion that political ideology are either unrelated brain lateralization, or correlate weakly in the opposite sense of your hypothesis, than I am of your hypothesis, which appears to be supported only by your own personal argument and anecdotes.

Originally Posted by questor

Your statement,
''If participants in this discussion intend to seriously explore possible neurological factors that influence political views and behavior, I suggest they avoid political specifics, such as examining and endorsing 2008 US presidential candidates''. I don't quite understand this statement.

My suggestion is intended to encourage objective distancing of participants in this thread from current political issues, which tend to emotionally excite and cognitively impair, from neuroscience, which requires emotional calm and cognitive objectivity. This is a common suggestion concerning scientific and medical issues, typified by such ethics as the commonplace avoidance by medical clinicians of performing diagnosis or therapy on family members or others for whom they have a strong positive or negative emotional attachment.

[questor]

I think there must be a middle connectivity pattern which would speak to those who may consider themselves ''moderates'' or middle of the roaders.
since we don't know the mechanism of how thoughts occur, it may be that
it is not so simple as right brain-left brain, and the whole ''wiring'' set up
may prove to be different from how it appears. I do know and feel confident that people can be divided as liberal or conservative according to their perception or reaction to certain issues and/or events. Calling someone
Democrat or Republican is not descriptive to me because of historical familial influence in picking a party to support. It is much more descriptive of a person's thought pattern to assess their opinions on a variety of issues. Is it not obvious that a large number of people think that goverment, entitlements, and higher taxes are the answer to most social ills, and an equally large number think that smaller goverment, lower taxes and individual initiative are the answer?
I do not consider this as just a question of whom one will vote for in 2008, but the very basis of the type society we will live in and the people who will lead us.

[HydrogenBond]

One difference between Republicans and Democrats can be seen in the labeling of Conservatives and Liberals. The Reps stay the course. While the Demos like change for the sake of change. This can loosely correlate to the brain hemispheres, with the right side a little more creative, implicit of the Demos. The number of new liberal ideas exceeds the scope of the changes coming from the conservatives.

Demos are more emotionally driven, and are more likely to worry about the feelings of others, including animals. The Reps are often portrayed as cooler hearted beyond a certain scope. This Demo feeling is also better equated to the right side of the brain, since it is irrational; not irrational in the sense of being crazy, but emotions can't be used for reasoning. The feelings act more like fuel to give their reason a direction. This starts right and then moves into the left and uses those feelings, as fuel for the left side logic. For example, it might start like; "poor whales". Then they get creative using logic to figure out how to make it better for the whales. The L logic is a means to the end, which is to figure out how to appease the feeling.

Both parties use both sides of the brain, just the Demo's are more likely to add creative impulse and emotion from the right to fuel the left. The Reps tend to use the beaten path of tradition which is more easily focused in the left due to training, without wanting to add a lot of changes. They tend to go left to right using this logic system for the fuel of their emotions. The emotion is used to reinforce the well traveled conservative path. The strong emotion is there as a means to an end, which is their system.

Let me give an example of these two dynamics, L-R and R-L. If you just got a new job in a company, it is often very conservative. Management does not want someone new to rock the boat. The establishment knows the system and is very functional within the left hemisphere, i.e., rational. To make a change could create gaps in their well organized logic system. Based on that system, they could get emotional resisting any form of change. It is the well tuned L machine, generating a supporting R side emotion, that is used to make sure the L machine stays the course and doesn't change.

The person trying to make that change, if he goes L-R, he may fight a few battles but will give up since he is no match for the machine. The better way is to go R-L. What this does is give him an emotional fuel, i.e., eye of the tiger. The emotion just keeps on pushing, almost irrationally. The emotion is driving left side reason. One not may see the logical implications of their short term actions. Their emotions may fluctuate, fluctuating the left output both in a negative and positive way.

You sort of have to hand it to the liberals in that they just keep pushing with their R side emotional fuel. Not all their ideas are logical, but the emotions causes the tide to turn. It is sort of the party that keeps emotionally pushing for change and slowly chips away.
.