As I've suspected, there's an increasing amount of evidence that one is born on one side of the fence or another; predestined to be what they call conservative these days or Liberal. Yes, I'm very wary of these terms, since they mean what their enemies say they mean and have little to do with conserving anything real, or with the concept of reform, but still, there seem to be two kinds of minds and it's hard to account for it as merely the product of experience or study or intelligence.
Yes, I've joked about the far right not having a sense of humor that differs from meanness and I can think of all kinds of nominally Liberal reformers who would crumble if they ever smiled, but that impression isn't unique to me and I find it compelling. Some people find their view of reality far too serious, too dangerous and threatening to find much to laugh about, unless it's to laugh about the discomfiture and humiliation of an enemy.
That there are indeed two kinds of minds; two predispositions toward political, religious and sociological poles, is compelling, not that I would suggest using any evidence for it to dismiss arguments from either side. Sometimes, Conservative is actually conservative and Liberal is just Liberal and the truth may be neutral.
There may be important evidence for physical differences between those who feel threatened, respond to perceived threats with more aggression, more disgust and less tolerance for uncertainty. A taste for strongly held credos about morality and politics almost defines such people and we usually call them conservatives. A distaste for absolute moral judgments; for saying something is "just wrong" without considering the results defines those we want to call Liberals.
"Liberal Brains" seem more tolerant of uncertainty than conservatives according to a study of brain scans of 90 volunteers at University College London. Brain scans revealed, or so it's claimed, physical differences
"Previously, some psychological traits were known to be predictive of an individual's political orientation, our study now links such personality traits with specific brain structure."says researcher Ryota Kanai.
"People with a large amygdala are "more sensitive to disgust" and tend to "respond to threatening situations with more aggression than do liberals and are more sensitive to threatening facial expressions. Liberals are linked to larger anterior cingulate cortexes, a region that "monitor(s) uncertainty and conflicts"So is this cause or effect? Are these findings real? Maybe it's too soon to tell and I can certainly identify some traits that would make me more conservative than the stereotypical Liberal. What I am is for others to say, but I certainly find fault in many standard Liberal shibboleths, even if I'm intolerant of certainty and that includes being certain that the study means anything.
"Our findings are consistent with the proposal that political orientation is associated with psychological processes for managing fear and uncertainty"says the report and that feels right, even if many wrong things feel right. I'm just not afraid of the conservative bogeymen like net neutrality, graduated income tax, single payer health programs or Social Security. I am however concerned about the danger of inflexible creeds that seem to need a great deal of misplaced faith to follow and a government that follows such things without regard to the will of the electorate, the lessons of history or even the demands of common decency. I believe in uncertainty.
So is my anterior cingulate cortex bigger or smaller and does size matter? It's not as though I'm free of fear, I just fear the fearful and the things they do.
I read about this in Sci-Am a few years ago. Since most of liberals live by the coast, perhaps the lack of Omega 3 seafood inland is the culprit for the dysfunctional conservative brain...
ReplyDeletePeople inland used to get a lot of goiters until God revealed that it was a lack of seafood and the Iodine in it. I'll wait until God confirms the fish oil thing before I make up my mind.
ReplyDeleteI have noted that my children, who exhibited distinct personality traits, have generally maintained those traits into adulthood. Likewise in my youth, I was always naturally questioning everything and slow to accept and believe what I was presented with. I was uncomfortable with religion at an early age.
ReplyDeleteSome people would attribute these personality distinctions to Astrology.
(Laughing!) A reasonable position.
ReplyDelete40 or so years ago, when I was making children, the received wisdom was that children were a totally blank slate and their personalities the summation of all that was said to them -- hence one should never say no.
ReplyDeleteSuch ideas only seem real to those who haven't had more than one child. They're born different. So I abandoned that faith. I never did buy into the one that had all gender differences the result of cultural pressure. Perhaps a journey to my spleen would explain it, but I'm too spiteful to bother.
Of course that bit of experience generated skepticism made me a bit of a heretic and didn't do much for my marriage, but I've had two thirds of a century too much of political opinions dressed up in robes and experts contemplating their navels and telling us to believe because after all we're Liberals and we believe the Liberal catechism of the day without question. (Unlike those conservatives, of course.)
I Realized rather early that I was lying to myself about God. It was as much the result of the obvious irrelevance of life in the universe as the product of an inward journey. Agnosticism was somewhere near my kidneys, as I recall.