Research: The intellectual differences between liberals and conservatives

[M.D. Rawlings]

I was reading an interesting article that looked at the differences in brain structure between samples of people who identified themselves as liberal and people who identified as conserative. The study indicates that conservatives have larger amygdalas while liberals have larger anterior cingulate cortexes.

The amygdala is involved with memory and processing emotional reactions. This suggest that conservatives are more efficient at processing threats.

The anterior cingulate cortex is involved with several autonomic functions, such as regulating blood pressure and heart rate, as well as rational cognitive functions like reward anticipation, decision-making, empathy and emotion. This means that liberals may be more efficient at managing conflicting information

Current Biology - Political Orientations Are Correlated with Brain Structure in Young Adults

This study says that liberals, on average, have higher IQ's than conservatives:

Why Liberals and Atheists Are More Intelligent

I can't wait for all of the rants about the supposed "liberal indoctrination" in higher education as a response to this thread.

Another poster suggests that liberals are more open-minded in general as he categorically confounds "technology reluctance", a connotation of the term conservative, with conservative as in political ideology. The conservatives I know are quite open to and adept at handling new technology. LOL!

But let us cut to the chase. Contemporary political conservatism in America is the classical liberalism of laissez-faire, the Anglo-American political theory of the Enlightenment, the stuff of free-wheeling markets for goods and services and ideas, rugged individualism and small government. In short, much liberty. Contemporary political liberalism in America is collectivist claptrap, the statism of group think la-la, rooted in an historically tried and failed ideology. In fact, liberalism is not so much an ideology any more as much as it is a collection of slogans. It's the stuff of emotionalism, not the stuff of facts and logic.

Leftists continue to tout these kinds of contrivances with their biased conclusions as a means of demonizing their political opponents: ad hominem in the place of an argument for that which is historically and rationally indefensible.

 

[rdean]

This isn't the first time you've been so dishonest. You make a statement you falsely attribute to me and then argue against what is a ridiculous position that you completely made up. You have no shame. Seriously, you are damaged goods. The worst part is you know it and don't care.

Just because I make statements that contradict your beliefs does not mean I am dishonest, it just means your beliefs are wrong.

I've always said the Democratic Party is a coalition party made up of many diverse groups of people. People that aren't welcome in the Republican Party, which, of course, is 90% white.

You have always said a lot of things, none of which are true. Everyone is welcome in the Republican party, even blacks, (Alan West, Herman Cain) Hispanics, (Marco Rubio, Joe Araaio) and gays (The Log Cabin Republicans who just forced Obama to finally get rid of DADT).



You should tell all these people that they are not Republicans, they might join your coalition.

What is the Secular Right? · Secular Right

Skeptical Conservatives

Muslim Republicans Muslim Conservatives GOP Islam Moslem



Fundagelic, that is a neat word. Tell me the truth, who did you steal it from?



Waiting for what? Your denial of the truth?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/religion-and-ethics/123670-religious-left.html

The poll was conducted through telephone calls using land lines. The vast majority of those using land lines are much older and less educated. I use Skype. I don't even own a phone.

What your links did point out was the incredible diversity within the Democrat Party that simply doesn't exist within the Republican party. Of course, to a party that is 90% white, "diversity" is a "bad" thing.

Once again you printed everything except your "false statement". Here, let me help you:


I already showed you numbers that prove that Democrats are more likely to believe Jesus will return by 2050 than Republicans, yet you continue to insist that only Republicans believe it.

I continue to insist? Of course you can prove that, right. It's OK. We both know you can't.

You see. You're a lying sack of....well, you know. We ALL know.

I have to admit the part about the Log Cabin Republicans were the reason DADT finally ended was "inspired". How you make this stuff up shows you are a very creative person. Hilarious.

If all these minorities were welcome in the Republican Party, that party would look more like the Democrats and not 90% white.

Then all these Perry, Paul, Santorum, Bachmann and so on quotes pop up and Republicans, such as yourself, say, "That's not what they said" or "That's not what they meant".

Well, try as you might, you can't put lipstick on a pig.

 

[Full-Auto]

Liberals also generally accept new technology while conservatives, by definition, want nothing to do with progress.

Hence the conservative title.

I do not see liberals being more intelligent, just more open minded.

Conservatives resist new technology and liberals embrace it? Why do liberals like light rail? Do you really think that something that has to run on tracks that cannot be moved works better than a bus that can take a different route to avoid problems? Doesn't it make more sense to buy 8 buses that are more flexible and can carry more people than it does to purchase a single light rail car that shuts down completely if there is an accident?

For the record, being a conservative, I oppose light rail because it sucks, not because it is new.

There is also the point that every technophile I have EVER known has been conservative. (Not necessarily republican)

Also if we don't work on things like the light rail now, the technology will never advance to the point where it would be better than the old shit it is replacing.

Imagine if they had never build the car because at first it was more trouble than a horse and far more costly?

At what cost.

The twenty miles we got in Seattle cost a billion. Ridership not meeting expectations.

 

[DiamondDave]

Liberals also generally accept new technology while conservatives, by definition, want nothing to do with progress.

Hence the conservative title.

I do not see liberals being more intelligent, just more open minded.

Absolute rubbish... I work with, study, purchase, embrace, and anticipate more with technology than you probably can imagine... and I am a staunch fiscal conservative, as are most of my friends, co-workers, and colleagues...

Your wishful assumptions are ridiculous

 

[Photonic]

Conservatives resist new technology and liberals embrace it? Why do liberals like light rail? Do you really think that something that has to run on tracks that cannot be moved works better than a bus that can take a different route to avoid problems? Doesn't it make more sense to buy 8 buses that are more flexible and can carry more people than it does to purchase a single light rail car that shuts down completely if there is an accident?

For the record, being a conservative, I oppose light rail because it sucks, not because it is new.

There is also the point that every technophile I have EVER known has been conservative. (Not necessarily republican)

Also if we don't work on things like the light rail now, the technology will never advance to the point where it would be better than the old shit it is replacing.

Imagine if they had never build the car because at first it was more trouble than a horse and far more costly?

At what cost.

The twenty miles we got in Seattle cost a billion. Ridership not meeting expectations.

See, that's where things get messed up, they should have done a research on the population that it's meant for.

Los Angeles has a massive car culture, so naturally the roads are packed 10 hours out of the day. If you have never been to Southern California imagine if your rush hour was 3 times more packed and lasted 5 hours in the morning and 5 hours in the evening.

 

[Billy000]

There is also the point that every technophile I have EVER known has been conservative. (Not necessarily republican)

Also if we don't work on things like the light rail now, the technology will never advance to the point where it would be better than the old shit it is replacing.

Imagine if they had never build the car because at first it was more trouble than a horse and far more costly?

At what cost.

The twenty miles we got in Seattle cost a billion. Ridership not meeting expectations.

See, that's where things get messed up, they should have done a research on the population that it's meant for.

Los Angeles has a massive car culture, so naturally the roads are packed 10 hours out of the day. If you have never been to Southern California imagine if your rush hour was 3 times more packed and lasted 5 hours in the morning and 5 hours in the evening.

This thread has certainly turned into something else entirely, hasn't it?

 

[chikenwing]

Liberals also generally accept new technology while conservatives, by definition, want nothing to do with progress.

Hence the conservative title.

I do not see liberals being more intelligent, just more open minded.

What?? you couldn't be more wrong. You really don't know any real conservatives do you?
The acceptance of new Tech !!! that's just plan a laugh. Total lack of understanding.

 

[westwall]

There is also the point that every technophile I have EVER known has been conservative. (Not necessarily republican)

Also if we don't work on things like the light rail now, the technology will never advance to the point where it would be better than the old shit it is replacing.

Imagine if they had never build the car because at first it was more trouble than a horse and far more costly?

At what cost.

The twenty miles we got in Seattle cost a billion. Ridership not meeting expectations.

See, that's where things get messed up, they should have done a research on the population that it's meant for.

Los Angeles has a massive car culture, so naturally the roads are packed 10 hours out of the day. If you have never been to Southern California imagine if your rush hour was 3 times more packed and lasted 5 hours in the morning and 5 hours in the evening.

And the best way to reduce that is through teleworking or some other flexwork system. Most paper pushing jobs can be quite easily accompished from the persons home. If you want to reduce people in cars, institute mandatory telework for those industries that can accomodate it.

My wife has done extensive work with the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governements and she and her colleagues were able to get 300,000 people off of the roads thorough telework implementation.

Light rail is an industry based on corruption. It is a massive slush fund for politicians, bureaucrats and industrialists to steal money from the taxpayer.

 

[Photonic]

Liberals also generally accept new technology while conservatives, by definition, want nothing to do with progress.

Hence the conservative title.

I do not see liberals being more intelligent, just more open minded.

What?? you couldn't be more wrong. You really don't know any real conservatives do you?
The acceptance of new Tech !!! that's just plan a laugh. Total lack of understanding.

You would not be conservative if you were accepting of change.

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve")[1] is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports, at the most, minimal and gradual change in society. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others oppose modernism and seek a return to the way things were.[2][3] The first established use of the term in a political context was by François-René de Chateaubriand in 1819, following the French Revolution.[4] The term has since been used to describe a wide range of views.

 

[westwall]

At what cost.

The twenty miles we got in Seattle cost a billion. Ridership not meeting expectations.

See, that's where things get messed up, they should have done a research on the population that it's meant for.

Los Angeles has a massive car culture, so naturally the roads are packed 10 hours out of the day. If you have never been to Southern California imagine if your rush hour was 3 times more packed and lasted 5 hours in the morning and 5 hours in the evening.

This thread has certainly turned into something else entirely, hasn't it?

They usually do. Once the ridiculousness of the OP was dealt with the discussion morphed into something more interesting.

 

[chikenwing]

Liberals also generally accept new technology while conservatives, by definition, want nothing to do with progress.

Hence the conservative title.

I do not see liberals being more intelligent, just more open minded.

What?? you couldn't be more wrong. You really don't know any real conservatives do you?
The acceptance of new Tech !!! that's just plan a laugh. Total lack of understanding.

You would not be conservative if you were accepting of change.

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve")[1] is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports, at the most, minimal and gradual change in society. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others oppose modernism and seek a return to the way things were.[2][3] The first established use of the term in a political context was by François-René de Chateaubriand in 1819, following the French Revolution.[4] The term has since been used to describe a wide range of views.

Really ?? funny doesn't always work,this painting with a HUGE brush.

 

[Photonic]

What?? you couldn't be more wrong. You really don't know any real conservatives do you?
The acceptance of new Tech !!! that's just plan a laugh. Total lack of understanding.

You would not be conservative if you were accepting of change.

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve")[1] is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports, at the most, minimal and gradual change in society. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others oppose modernism and seek a return to the way things were.[2][3] The first established use of the term in a political context was by François-René de Chateaubriand in 1819, following the French Revolution.[4] The term has since been used to describe a wide range of views.

Really ?? funny doesn't always work,this painting with a HUGE brush.

By labeling yourself conservative you are automatically painted. So why take the title if it doesn't describe you?

 

[westwall]

You would not be conservative if you were accepting of change.

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve")[1] is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports, at the most, minimal and gradual change in society. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others oppose modernism and seek a return to the way things were.[2][3] The first established use of the term in a political context was by François-René de Chateaubriand in 1819, following the French Revolution.[4] The term has since been used to describe a wide range of views.

Really ?? funny doesn't always work,this painting with a HUGE brush.

By labeling yourself conservative you are automatically painted. So why take the title if it doesn't describe you?

You know, I've never yet met a conservative who was a follower of Ned Lud. I've met some liberals who were closely allied with Mr. Lud, but so far no conservatives.

 

[Photonic]

Really ?? funny doesn't always work,this painting with a HUGE brush.

By labeling yourself conservative you are automatically painted. So why take the title if it doesn't describe you?

You know, I've never yet met a conservative who was a follower of Ned Lud. I've met some liberals who were closely allied with Mr. Lud, but so far no conservatives.

I'm just calling it by the book. Conservative is a title for those that oppose change in some form or another. It's the opposite of progressive, not liberal.

In fact, liberalism is the belief in the importance of liberty and human rights. The founding fathers were liberal in this regard.

 

[DiamondDave]

Liberals also generally accept new technology while conservatives, by definition, want nothing to do with progress.

Hence the conservative title.

I do not see liberals being more intelligent, just more open minded.

What?? you couldn't be more wrong. You really don't know any real conservatives do you?
The acceptance of new Tech !!! that's just plan a laugh. Total lack of understanding.

You would not be conservative if you were accepting of change.

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve")[1] is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports, at the most, minimal and gradual change in society. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity, while others oppose modernism and seek a return to the way things were.[2][3] The first established use of the term in a political context was by François-René de Chateaubriand in 1819, following the French Revolution.[4] The term has since been used to describe a wide range of views.

Absolute ignorant rubbish

 

[rdean]

Liberals also generally accept new technology while conservatives, by definition, want nothing to do with progress.

Hence the conservative title.

I do not see liberals being more intelligent, just more open minded.

What?? you couldn't be more wrong. You really don't know any real conservatives do you?
The acceptance of new Tech !!! that's just plan a laugh. Total lack of understanding.

Conservatives will most certainly accept new technology after liberals invent it.

 

[whitehall]

Researchers? If that's what you call creepy little democrat operatives who follow republican politicians and listen to private conversations you might have a point. I wonder which part of the brain is the pervert point? Put an EEg on Bubba Bill and find out how out of whack (pardon the pun) liberals are in that area.

 

[rdean]

Researchers? If that's what you call creepy little democrat operatives who follow republican politicians and listen to private conversations you might have a point. I wonder which part of the brain is the pervert point? Put an EEg on Bubba Bill and find out how out of whack (pardon the pun) liberals are in that area.

You mean like James O'Keefe?

Oops.

 

[alan1]

Liberals also generally accept new technology while conservatives, by definition, want nothing to do with progress.

Hence the conservative title.

I do not see liberals being more intelligent, just more open minded.

That must explain why only liberals own computers, only liberals post on the internet, only liberals own "smart" phones, only liberals invest in medical technology.
<end sarcasm>

 

[rdean]

Liberals also generally accept new technology while conservatives, by definition, want nothing to do with progress.

Hence the conservative title.

I do not see liberals being more intelligent, just more open minded.

That must explain why only liberals own computers, only liberals post on the internet, only liberals own "smart" phones, only liberals invest in medical technology.
<end sarcasm>

Conservatives do those things.

But when it comes to "only liberals invent smart phones, the Internet and Medical Technology", then we might be a little nearer the mark. After all, Republicans slash education and smear scientists.