Brain differences in political orientation

[jillio]

I'm asking about their political orientation. What if their country isn't divided into two political parties but into several? Or they have only one party? Or they have no parties?

What if it isn't? You are being too literal. The brain differnces are the result of a difference in the way one thinks about and perceives the world around them. That way of thnking and perceiving is consistent across many domains, not just the political domain. It just happens that the political domain is one in which the consisitencies can be easily demonstrated.

 

[DeafBadger]

There is plenty of research that support the findings of this study. In fact, this was a replication of earlier neurological studies. It simply applied it to a novel area: political orientation. You wouldn't question neurological implication involved in other areas of orientation, such as being oriented more toward math and science, or being oriented more introversion or extroversion, would you? I mean, that has been shown over and over and over. That is the same type of cognitive process involved in the tendency to politically orient toward a certain way of thinking and perceiving.

Hmm. That is a good point.

I think a person's culture has more influence though. Take the issue of animal rights. There are people who believe that hunting is absolutely wrong and consider it "murder." Then there are some people who hunt and don't see anything wrong with it.

I don't think it is a coincidence that the former opinion tends to be held more by urban dwellers who are insulated from country life. And that the latter opinion tends to be held by those who are located closer to the rural environment.

Same thing with perceptions about where food comes from. Growing up, I helped my aunt and uncle butcher chickens on their farm. I have no illusions about where the food on my table comes from. Yet, I'm continually taken aback by people who have no idea where their food comes from. Some of these people will take positions on whether it is wrong or right to harvest animals.

Likewise, people from rural areas can often be very naive about big city life. They can have a lot of misconceptions about it. For example, where I live, people perceive Minneapolis metropolitan area to be an extraordinarily dangerous place to be. All that crime! But I know people who live there and I will probably eventually move there myself. I've traveled there many times. It has never struck me as extraordinarily dangerous. "Keep your wits about you," perhaps, but not "Here there be dragons," dangerous.

I bet if those same people who have these perceptions would have grown up in the other place, they would no longer hold those views.

A person's experiences, the cultural soup they were raised in and current live in, the variety of stuff they read and think about (or don't read and think about), seems to me better predictors of political orientation.

But I have to admit, your argument that there could be hard-wired political tendencies for politics as there are for various aptitudes is a reasonable one.

 

[deafskeptic]

No, they had a one-party system for too long. So all their brains must be alike, no doubt.

I was referring to the Soviet Union's totalitarian approach to the arts and pretty much every thing else. It certainly showed even after Glasnost.

 

[Beach girl]

Leftist brains, then?

 

[jillio]

I know the feeling. I wouldn't consider myself liberal, nor conservative either. Arghhh.

However, you do process information and demonstrate the cognitive functioning that would support the greater volume in the ACC. So even if you don't identify yourself politically as a "liberal", you still have the brain that is evident in those who do identify as liberal. And the consistencies are evident in your world view as expressed on many topics here.

 

[Beowulf]

I was referring to the Soviet Union's totalitarian approach to the arts and pretty much every thing else. It certainly showed even after Glasnost.

Yep, those fear-laden few in power had their way with the folk, didn't they?

 

[jillio]

Really? The more I think about it, the more I think it is true. Obviously, the different constructions of brains determine thoughts and actions; otherwise, everyone would be exactly the same. Take a village deep in the Amazon jungle, for example: everyone is exposed to the same culture and teachings, but some members become potters, others fighters, others teachers, and others healers, etc. The choices are made in that cultural soup and it best fits their "personality," which I think is determined by the inner workings of the brain.
I could be wrong, of course.

Nope. You are right on target.

 

[Beowulf]

Leftist brains, then?

Hardly.

 

[DeafBadger]

Really? The more I think about it, the more I think it is true. Obviously, the different constructions of brains determine thoughts and actions; otherwise, everyone would be exactly the same. Take a village deep in the Amazon jungle, for example: everyone is exposed to the same culture and teachings, but some members become potters, others fighters, others teachers, and others healers, etc. The choices are made in that cultural soup and it best fits their "personality," which I think is determined by the inner workings of the brain.
I could be wrong, of course.

Well, you have a good point. But everyone in a cultural paradigm is expected to adhere to an acceptable range of political opinion. This is culturally defined. In the meta-culture like the "nation of America", and in the micro-culture like regions, states, religions, political ideologies, professions, etc within the nation of America.

(These are not scientific terms I'm using, I'm just explaining my opinion and perspective.

So if you say that someone has a tendency towards one political orientation or another, it is still within that culturally defined range. Go to a different country or different tribe, and you might have a very different culturally defined range.

It's not the tendency one way or another that's most important. It's the range of accepted opinion defined by the cultural soup.

IMO.

 

[deafskeptic]

Yep, those fear-laden few in power had their way with the folk, didn't they?

They were the conservatives of Soviet Union - not the liberals - too.

However, I think it would be much more accurate to say they were extremely authoritarian in their thinking. The authoritarian left and the right have much in common when one thinks about it.

 

[jillio]

Leftist brains, then?

Uh, no.

 

[Beowulf]

Well, you have a good point. But everyone in a cultural paradigm is expected to adhere to an acceptable range of political opinion. This is culturally defined. In the meta-culture like the "nation of America", and in the micro-culture like regions, states, religions, political ideologies, professions, etc within the nation of America.

(These are not scientific terms I'm using, I'm just explaining my opinion and perspective.

So if you say that someone has a tendency towards one political orientation or another, it is still within that culturally defined range. Go to a different country or different tribe, and you might have a very different culturally defined range.

It's not the tendency one way or another that's most important. It's the range of accepted opinion defined by the cultural soup.

IMO.

So you think tendencies are entirely inconsequential? In the long run, their results will be seen, don't you think? Opinion forming may work for a while, but the tendencies are still there.

 

[jillio]

Hmm. That is a good point.

I think a person's culture has more influence though. Take the issue of animal rights. There are people who believe that hunting is absolutely wrong and consider it "murder." Then there are some people who hunt and don't see anything wrong with it.

I don't think it is a coincidence that the former opinion tends to be held more by urban dwellers who are insulated from country life. And that the latter opinion tends to be held by those who are located closer to the rural environment.

Same thing with perceptions about where food comes from. Growing up, I helped my aunt and uncle butcher chickens on their farm. I have no illusions about where the food on my table comes from. Yet, I'm continually taken aback by people who have no idea where their food comes from. Some of these people will take positions on whether it is wrong or right to harvest animals.

Likewise, people from rural areas can often be very naive about big city life. They can have a lot of misconceptions about it. For example, where I live, people perceive Minneapolis metropolitan area to be an extraordinarily dangerous place to be. All that crime! But I know people who live there and I will probably eventually move there myself. I've traveled there many times. It has never struck me as extraordinarily dangerous. "Keep your wits about you," perhaps, but not "Here there be dragons," dangerous.

I bet if those same people who have these perceptions would have grown up in the other place, they would no longer hold those views.

A person's experiences, the cultural soup they were raised in and current live in, the variety of stuff they read and think about (or don't read and think about), seems to me better predictors of political orientation.

But I have to admit, your argument that there could be hard-wired political tendencies for politics as there are for various aptitudes is a reasonable one.

Culture certainly has an impact, but if it were the greatest impact, we would see all individuals reacting the same given the same cultural experience. It is this variance in reaction to, understanding of, and categorizing that experience that can be explained by differences in the structure of the brain. Culture most certainly can impact the brain and the way that we think, perceive, and process. But the brain also governs how the individual reacts to that cultural experience. Twin studies done in various areas of psychological reseach supports that.

 

[DeafBadger]

So you think tendencies are entirely inconsequential? In the long run, their results will be seen, don't you think? Opinion forming may work for a while, but the tendencies are still there.

No, I didn't say they are inconsequential. I'm saying they appear (in my meager personal observations) to function within the range of politics or opinion the culture defines.

For example, mainstream Christianity could be plotted on a range from, say, Southern Baptist to Episcopalian. This entire range is "Christian," yet people within this range will consider others to be "to the right" or "to the left". You could say that "tendencies" express themselves within this range.

But to people outside the Christian culture, the entire range seems conservative to them. Or to me, anyway. But people within the culture don't see it that way. They are expressing their tendencies within the defined range.

Same thing with other cultures.

 

[KarissaMann05]

Hardly.

Uh, no.

But, to me, it look like liberals are "winners".

 

[DeafBadger]

Culture certainly has an impact, but if it were the greatest impact, we would see all individuals reacting the same given the same cultural experience. It is this variance in reaction to, understanding of, and categorizing that experience that can be explained by differences in the structure of the brain. Culture most certainly can impact the brain and the way that we think, perceive, and process. But the brain also governs how the individual reacts to that cultural experience. Twin studies done in various areas of psychological reseach supports that.

Hmm. I see your point.

I'm not saying that I know anything about the stuff, by any means. :P

I have to crash for now and get sleep for tomorrow. I'll pick up this thread later.

Good night, all!

 

[jillio]

No, I didn't say they are inconsequential. I'm saying they appear (in my meager personal observations) to function within the range of politics or opinion the culture defines.

For example, mainstream Christianity could be plotted on a range from, say, Southern Baptist to Episcopalian. This entire range is "Christian," yet people within this range will consider others to be "to the right" or "to the left". You could say that "tendencies" express themselves within this range.

But to people outside the Christian culture, the entire range seems conservative to them. Or to me, anyway. But people within the culture don't see it that way. They are expressing their tendencies within the defined range.

Same thing with other cultures.

There is a conservative religious perspective that transcends even the conservative Christiam perspective. How many religious conservatives do you know that are liberal politically? See what I mean? That consevative thought process is consistent across domains regardless of cultural consistency. Cultural consistency is more of a group phenomena, while the differences leading to a conservative thought process across domains is an individual phenomena.

 

[Beach girl]

Are you denying that the former Soviet Union was to the extreme left of the political spectrum?

 

[jillio]

Hmm. I see your point.

I'm not saying that I know anything about the stuff, by any means. :P

I have to crash for now and get sleep for tomorrow. I'll pick up this thread later.

Good night, all!

Thanks for participating in the discussion!

 

[deafskeptic]

Are you denying that the former Soviet Union was to the extreme left of the political spectrum?

I'm afraid you're being a bit literal.