ScienceDaily (Apr. 7, 2011) — We all know that people at opposite ends of the political spectrum often really can't see eye to eye. Now, a new report published online on April 7th in Current Biology, reveals that those differences in political orientation are tied to differences in the very structures of our brains.
Individuals who call themselves liberal tend to have larger anterior cingulate cortexes, while those who call themselves conservative have larger amygdalas. Based on what is known about the functions of those two brain regions, the structural differences are consistent with reports showing a greater ability of liberals to cope with conflicting information and a greater ability of conservatives to recognize a threat, the researchers say.
"Previously, some psychological traits were known to be predictive of an individual's political orientation," said Ryota Kanai of the University College London. "Our study now links such personality traits with specific brain structure."
I suppose this indicates that we actually need both types, and it explains why compromise between the two might be a good idea for a Republic and its continued well-being.
--
Posts
5 comments:
This study confirms what I have always felt, growing up and living in Michigan. The conservative church types who were leaders in my dad's church, I always felt were hard wire that way, and that their embrace of Christianity was for what they perceived to be its conservative moralistic world view. They chose it because of how they already were, inside.
Very gratefully, in spite of everyone around us, my parents were liberal politically. I never really get past the joy of it, how they combined the values of a Christian perspective (love, compassion, empathy, hearts for the poor and down-and-out) with progressive attitudes.
Yes, and then we all project what is "inside" us to the external world.
That's pretty much why I think the notion of Absolute Truth is a crock: it is an internal state of affairs and emotions and morality that has absolutely no foundation in any "external" reality.
Similarly, I disdain the notion of "There is no absolute, everything goes!" Again, a stupid projection.
You're lucky to have had such parents.
I agree with you about the absolute truth. There must be a human trait that wants something absolute to cling to. But just because we want it doesn't mean it exists.
I meant to say about the men in my dad's church I grew up around, that they were mostly engineers with Oldsmobile. My father-in-law is also a retired engineer, and very into the black and white code of things. Of course not all engineers see everything in black and white or are attracted to strict rules, but I really think there is a link between the ones I grew up with who needed to follow Christianity because they believed it laid out an absolute, logical system to follow. How anyone creates a system of logic from the Bible is beyond me, but they manage it nonetheless.
People create a system of logical religion from the Bible in the same way they create poetry by Oulipo.
You approach a language-thing and change it around to another language-thing that causes a better emotional response.
(The emotion is extra-Oulipo, but I see no reason why there could no be another form of Oulipo that aims for emotional reactions, too.)
The nonsense of the Bible Code a few years ago ( and still thriving in some areas ) was/is based on this same phenomenon:
mental events are like smoke...
the mental states behind words are not chained to the printed page...
they are free to change into smoke or fog... and re-create themselves
...and speaking of the Bible Code phenomenon, how insane is that? You have believers that the Bible is absolute truth, the word of God, yet they subject it to transforms which add to it, and thus change it.
They say the hidden meanings are always there, but there are as many hidden meanings as there are possible permutations of the "codes" they use.
So there may be no limit to the meanings... and "absolute truth" has no limits and therefore cannot be defined nor grasped...
interesting.
Post a Comment