Brain thickness determines political leaning: study

[panzerfaust]

Source: Sydney Morning Herald (Oz)

Neuroscientists are examining whether political allegiances are hard-wired into people after finding evidence that the brains of conservatives are a different shape to those of left-wingers.

Scans of 90 students' brains at University College London (UCL) uncovered a "strong correlation" between the thickness of two particular areas of grey matter and an individual's views.

Self-proclaimed right-wingers had a more pronounced amygdala - a primitive part of the brain associated with emotion while their political opponents from the opposite end of the spectrum had thicker anterior cingulates...

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/brain-thickness-determines-political-leaning-study-20101229-199hk.html

---

Not published yet; but, too good to not be true?

[old mark]

1. K&R...nt

[DesertFlower]

2. i've always said jokingly that our

brains are wired differently. guess i was right.

[dorkulon]

3. Which came first, the ideology or the brain-shape? /nt

[mopinko]

25. brain shape

between genetics, fetal environment, and early childhood environment, the brain is pretty complete long before we have any interest in politics. but the way the brain handles stimuli is pretty set by early childhood.

[Larry Ogg]

132. New born identical twins separated at birth offer remarkably strong evidence that suggest

genetic wiring is different between individuals who grow up to be a progressive liberal thinker or a conservative imbecile or a psychopath, respectively. An obvious difference might be, for instance, natural critical thinking skills needed to form proper conclusions, the ability to study the past and predict the future, i.e. hindsight and foresight / learning from ones mistakes etc...

[mopinko]

144. getting your soul crushed in an authoritarian family or

school will bend the arc there, too.

[sendero]

151. The only study I've read..

... about identical twins separated at birth (published in the New Yorker in the late 80s) had the exact opposite conclusion.

This guy studied (I think, could be off some on the number) 137 sets of twins. Among those where each twin was raised in a completely different environment, such as one going into a solid middle class family and the other into poverty, the researcher found that instances of mental illness (depression, etc) were almost IDENTICAL for each sets of twins both in when in their life they experienced it and how debilitating it was.

This study concluded that environmental factors had LITTLE OR NO relevance to most mental illnesses.

And in my own personal observations, I agree.

[SpiralHawk]

4. "Um, uh, d'oh." - So-called 'Conservatives' (R)

"As soon as our highly superior FEAR & FAIL centers process these, um, facts and stuff, we will get back to you."

- Fear-Based "Conservatives" (R)

[femrap]

102. lol!

That looks like my right wing uncle.

[florida08]

5. interesting

right wingers are more emotional.

When your amygdala is out of control, you can experience aggressive reactions towards problem solving situations. If, in addition to this, your brain has a small anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), not only you get easily angry, but you even stay angry for a long time. The scientific explanation is that ACC controls your amygdala to regulate your behavior.

http://loranablog.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/keep-your-amygdala-cool-man/



http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v8/n6/fig_tab/nn0605-701_F1.html

[go west young man]

66. That explains why Boner's always crying.

[AlbertCat]

93. That explains why Boner's always crying.

No, all that alcohol explains why Bohner's always crying.

[femrap]

104. Maybe all the alcohol has soaked

his little amygdala????

[Uncle Joe]

72. Yesterday, I watched the new version movie of "12 Angry Men" and this seemed to be on display.

When your amygdala is out of control, you can experience aggressive reactions towards problem solving situations. If, in addition to this, your brain has a small anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), not only you get easily angry, but you even stay angry for a long time. The scientific explanation is that ACC controls your amygdala to regulate your behavior.

Reason and logic won the day, but the emotions had to be spent for some of the jurors before they finally came around. Jack Lemmon's character telling an embittered last holdout juror; George C Scott, "He's not your son, he's someone else's let him live."

[defendandprotect]

118. Interesting ... I was just watching "Capitalism - A Love Story" by Michael Moore and ....

shocked over again at how obvious it is that capitalism is really a war on humans

when it gets going --

One of my uncles used to remind us of that in saying, "We're all Indians" -- and

we should remind ourselves often of that "taking" and never giving back -- and of

the genocide by the "discoverers" -- and that we are, sadly, in the same gene pool

which gave us that horrific violence. I think we are recognizing now that what the

US/CIA has done to the rest of the world does finally come home to be visited upon

us, as well.



:(



.

[awoke_in_2003]

147. everything they spout is pure emotion...

usually hatred and fear. Logic doesn't enter into their thinking.

[shawn703]

6. To anyone familiar with the amygdala

Are more pronounced amygdala also found in sociopaths, or some other personality disorder?

[rasputin1952]

22. Here's some stuff from an article...

<snip>

In addition to its role in emotion and unconscious emotional memory, the amygdala is also involved in the regulation or modulation of a variety of cognitive functions, such as attention, perception, and explicit memory. It is generally thought that these cognitive functions are modulated by the amygdala's processing of the emotional significance of external stimuli. Outputs of the amygdala then lead to the release of hormones and/or neuromodulators in the brain that then alter cognitive processing in cortical areas. For example, via amygdala outputs that ultimately affect the hippocampus, explicit memories about emotional situations are enhanced. For example, glucocorticoid hormone released into the blood stream via amygdala activity travels to the brain and then binds to neurons in the basal amygdala. The latter then connects to the hippocampus to enhance explicit memory. There is also evidence that the amygdala can, through direct neural connections, modulate the function of cortical areas.

Over the past decade, interest in the human amygdala has grown considerably, spurred on by the progress in animal studies and by the development of functional imaging techniques. As in the animal brain, damage to the human amygdala interferes with fear conditioning and functional activity changes in the human amygdala in response to fear conditioning. Further, exposure to emotional faces potently activates the human amygdala. Both conditioned stimuli and emotional faces produce strong amygdala activation when presented unconsciously, emphasizing the importance of the amygdala as an implicit information processor and its role in unconscious memory. Studies of humans and non-human primates also implicate the amygdala in social behavior. Findings regarding the human amygdala are mainly at the level of the whole region rather than nuclei.

Structural and/or functional changes in the amygdala are associated with a wide variety of psychiatric conditions in humans. Included are various anxiety disorders (PTSD, phobia, and panic), depression, schizophrenia, and autism, to name a few. This does not mean that amygdala causes these disorders. It simply means that in people who have these disorders alterations occur in the amygdala. Because each of these disorders involves fear and anxiety to some extent, the involvement of the amygdala in some of these disorders may be related to the increased anxiety in these patients.

<snip>

http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Amygdala

Interesting link, goes into Pavlovian responses and a few other aspects, and while scientific, it is understandable to the layman...graphics in article.

[mudplanet]

67. It;s what Hunter Thompson called "the reptile brain"

[Rosa Luxemburg]

97. Republicans are sure primative

[mwb970]

7. I think we already knew this anecdotally, no?

Not the details about brain shapes. The fact that right-wingers don't think like we do and indeed, by our standards, barely seem to think at all.

The wholesale rejection on the right of science, as well as logic, reason, evidence, proof, history, etc., gives a clue that there is something special going on in these people's heads.

Recent research shows that when confronted with incontrovertible proof that their position on an issue is wrong, conservatives will "double down", believing the false information even more intensely than they did before it was proven false. This is simply not the way a normal, functioning human brain works. New information leads to an evolution (gasp) in one's views. That is, if one is not a right-winger.

We have facts, logic, and the human power of reason on our side. They have only emotion, primarily fear and hate. So why are they winning?

[Botany]

12. So why are they winning?

They have control of the media and the money too. Control over the voting
machines helps too.

Rush is paid all that money to spoon feed lies to those who already "know everything"
and by that they are kept always stirred up and angry against us "libs" who caused
all this country's problems.

BTW we still have the Senate, the White House, and if biology and nature do their work
we will have the Supreme Court too. Sadly, it will take years to get rid of all the
less then stellar judges that are packed on the Federal Bench from Reagan, Bush I,
and Bush II.

[elocs]

36. Even if you are more intelligent, if someone else plays the game better, they win.

Wasn't it just a couple of years ago after the big Democratic wins that there was all of this dancing and celebrating about how it was all over for the Republicans. So how has that worked out?

With Republicans only having to defend about 10 seats in the 2012 election I think it is a safe bet that the Senate will be lost to them. If Obama is reelected with Republicans controlling both houses then we had better see a line in the sand and that veto pen ready. Democrats also need to learn from Republicans how to use any tactics or parliamentary procedures to thwart their opponents.

[femrap]

105. It's the Dunning-Kruger

Syndrome....It explained so much for me.

[elocs]

108. Dunning–Kruger effect:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled people make poor decisions and reach erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to realize their mistakes.<1> The unskilled therefore suffer from illusory superiority, rating their own ability as above average, much higher than it actually is, while the highly skilled underrate their abilities, suffering from illusory inferiority. This leads to the situation in which less competent people rate their own ability higher than more competent people. It also explains why actual competence may weaken self-confidence. Competent individuals falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. "Thus, the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others."

I find this line interesting: "Competent individuals falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding."

I often find myself thinking that way, why when things seem so absolutely clear and logical and correct that everybody does not understand it. I think that's why we do not get teabaggers and freepers and right wingnuts.

[femrap]

128. I was really happy and

relieved to discover the work of Dunning and Kruger.

Competent people will also question themselves when attacked so vigorously by a person who is so stupid he/she doesn't realize how stupid he/she is.

Now that I realize this, I don't question myself as much. But it really doesn't do much good...the Righties just won't listen to FACTS.

[tomp]

149. you have to know what the game is first.

most people here assume the game is between democrats and republicans. wrong.

it's between rich and not rich.
it's between progressive an reactionary.
it's between civilized and uncivilized.

if you think obama's record when he HAD control of both houses is evidence of winning, then you and i are not on the same side.
if you think his record indicates any likelihood that he will veto reactionary bills, then i would like to see your brain scan.

this is not meant to be personal. as usual, i'm trying to get people to see that obama and the democratic party are not friends of the not rich, the progressives, or the civilized.

[elocs]

152. The rich, reactionary, and uncivilized are part of the base of Republicans.

Republicans represent their interests and unfortunately it seems Democrats tend to as well.

The Republicans play a win at any cost game while Democrats seem to play not to lose and are desperate to be liked as they offer all manner of concessions to beg Republicans to please, please go along with them so everyone may join hands and sing Kumbaya. Republicans laugh, take the concessions, and then continue to play the game on their terms.

Friends? What are those?

[tomp]

155. well, you're part of the way there.

**"democrats tend to as well"?

democratic politicians do, definitively, without question, defend the rich. the only difference between the dems and the repubs is that the dems throw us bones and crumbs once in a while, ususally when there is no other way around it without massive rebellion, and usually while we're being massively screwed otherwise (see obama's record for definitive example). that is their role. that is the "game" they are playing.

**"seem to play to not lose" ?

what does that even mean? if the game is defending the interests of their natural base "not losing" would be wonderful. what you don't seem to get just yet is that that is not the game the dems are playing. the game the dems are playing is PRETEND to be for the masses, DEFEND THE RICH. if you haven't noticed they are "winning" THAT game hands down. that is obama at peak performance.

**"desperate to be liked as they offer all manner of concessions to beg Republicans to please, please go along with them so everyone may join hands and sing Kumbaya."

this is where you're showing a little too much reliance on TV (or even DU) sound bites. The dems and the repubs are fast friends. you can see them socializing together, joking around together, the bushes, clintons, obamas, etc, all fraternity chums. you see them before or after political "service" working for the same companies, slapping each other on the back, roasting each other in good fun, real pals.

don't kid yourself. they are well liked because they work for the same team, their bread is buttered on the same side, by the same knife, which would cut their throats in a heartbeat if they went off message for a millisecond. both the repubs and the dems play their roles TO PERFECTION. that, and the fact that americans are so generally gullible and timid, is why we are in the mess we are in

**"friends?" ?

the people with the same interests as you can usually be counted on as friends. but good friends are hard to find. false friends are everywhere in politics. i don't know about you, but it usually doesn't take me long to figure out if someone is a true friend or not.

the trick is in getting as many people on the same page as possible. our only power is in our numbers. if you really want to help poor, working, and middle class people, denounce the actions of the democratic party as a whole, both currently and historically. demand the the few true progressives left take appropriate action in distinguishing themselves from the vast majority of dems (there's only so far i can go on this board regarding "appropriate action").

[nyc 4 Biden]

40. They aren't winning...

They (right-wingers) are manipulated like sheep into following the will of the greedy individuals that are in power in corporate america. If the true believers were running things we would mop the floor with them. We are facing highly manipulative anti-social misanthropes. Our only weapon is the truth.

[ReadTomPaine]

77. It's easy to take advantage of people with empathy.

Especially when you have none. That's the answer, in a nutshell.

[harun]

81. They are communicating better.

Conservatives tell people what they want to hear, they play to their emotions and they play the fear card every chance they get. Liberals feel using fear is beneath them. They feel having to use fear means their attempt at a well reasoned argument failed.

Liberals don't understand the language of the common man as well as the Conservatives because most of them spend their lives learning the language of the educated, enlightened and intellectual.

[defendandprotect]

119. Because violence always wins ... and we've had 50+ years of rw political violence ....

There is only way the right wing can rise and that's via violence --

stolen elections -- and lies.

And we've had it all -- and they will continue to deliver it.

[Bragi]

15. Not quite so...

In fact, neurology shows that everyone -- right and left -- processes information -- at least initially -- so as to reaffirm existing beliefs.

My view is that we really do need to pay more attention to neuro-science when trying to understand politics, and why people do what they do, why they vote as they vote.

Neuro-science may explain not explain what's wrong with Kansas, but point out to us how we can more effectively breek the cycle of people voting against their own interests.

[aquart]

56. Exactly. The right is expert at tailoring ads for their targets.

We need to be able to tailor ads to reach both our own and the others.

[AngryAmish]

58. Winner here

We like to think we use reason. We don't. I don't. Nobody does. The key to persuading people is 1) confirming prejudices then 2) giving folks enough ammunition to outargue the opposition.

Grim but true.

[Psephos]

91. Wow, very well said. n/t

[defendandprotect]

123. Perhaps ... but we also had a little different explanation of brain development

in an Amy Goodman article posted on the Home page --

I'll end this with a link to it -- but is this really about identifying a genetic

difference in brains or is it about a LACK of brain development?

the doctor/researcher involved in the Goodman look at addictions pointed to the

reality of how underdeveloped the human brain is at birth. Most animals on this

are born fairly ready for life -- we aren't. Our brains actually continue to develop

OUTSIDE of the womb.


I'd also point to how many readily accept that the right wing/Repugs are somehow

"better" at politics than Democrats without really challenging that notion.

We should all recall the more than 50+ years of right wing political violence --

assassinations -- stolen elections -- and propaganda lies have brought us to this time.


At the moment, I'm also rewatching Michael Moore's "Capialism" -- and it is impossible

to escape the idea that capitalism is the waging of war -- on nature, animal-life and humans.





http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x578409


:)

[glinda]

48. Because they have found each other. They have formed a large group.

[stubtoe]

69. The doubling down behavior you mention is perhaps the most marked characteristic.

It's impossible to argue with an irrational person. They just dig in their heels ever more.

Sounds like climate change deniers to me!

[Wednesdays]

111. So why are they winning?

In a nutshell, fear and hate are "exciting." Logic and reason are boring.

[quakerboy]

146. Why do you assume

that we are the normal ones? Ive heard other research indicating that certain forms of stress cause different brain development during pregnancy. And others that indicate that TV can induce that stress. Also, financial stress. Between those two, how many of the current and upcoming generations are likely to be physically disposed toward conservatism?

[mwb970]

150. I assume we are normal because we believe things that are true.

Conservatives believe things that are false, even after they are shown to be false, which is simply not what I call "normal".

Surely you saw the recent news stories about yet another study showing that Fox "News" viewers (i.e. conservatives) are the most misinformed of any media consumers in America, and they more they watch Fox "News" the less informed they are. There is no equivalent large group of extremely misinformed liberals. There is no liberal TV or radio channel that specializes in misinforming its viewers or listeners in order to advance a corporate fascist agenda, or any other agenda.

Falling for hateful lies because you like the sound of them, true or not true, is simply not normal human behavior, regardless of pregnancy stress or TV viewing or the other irrelevant factors you mention.

[quakerboy]

153. I think you missed my point.

Actually, as I look over the course of human history, it appears very common place for people to fall for lies. I look around, and the number of people I see who are inclined to ignore any factual evidence that might threaten their cozy worldview seem to vastly outnumber the number of us who are looking for truth.

My guess is that our difference here goes to the definition of normal. You seem to me to be using it as "how it should be" where I use it to mean "how it most often is".

[Botany]

8. Just as I have alway thought .....

..... Palin, Rush, Beck, Newt, and so on are speaking to the dipsticks of the world.
So when Palin talks about the country of Africa, Rush yammers on about Obama running
up the debt, or Newt's talking about family values, it all makes sense to the mouth breathers
on the right because their primitive brains "feels good" as it hear those lies.

I have yet to meet one righty who can tell me why invading a country that had nothing to do
w/ 9/11 was a good response to 9/11 all they can say is Saddam was a bad man and we
did the right thing. Now I know why.

[dmr]

84. This reminds me of a Family Guy episode

where Lois is running for mayor. In a debate, she wants to discuss the issues, but the audience blocks her out.

She quickly learns & captures their attention & applauds by just saying saying simple things.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YOh-rpvjYg

I guess we could learn from that episode.

She wins, becomes a corrupt politician, then quits out of guilt.

[valerief]

88. "9." I love that episode. My sister must have a teensy amygdala, because

she's a rageholic and has always been one.

So if Fox addresses this study, will they be saying this:
Studies show lefty brains are thick. They're thick-headed, but we righties always knew that.

[Evasporque]

9. From eating paint chips and eating glue as kids....nt

[quaker bill]

10. So, perhaps there is something measurable

to go along with the notion of "lizard brains" after all. Could 'splain a few things.

[go west young man]

68. Lizard brains. Great term for em.

Reminds me of the Star Trek episode where Kirk is fighting the lizard man on a lonely planet.
I may have to get a t-shirt made up to go with it!

[quaker bill]

106. Actually,

the amygdala is roughly the portion of our brain similar in ontogeny, gross anatomy, histology, and physiology, to the typical lizard brain. This is where the term arises amongst biologists, like me. Lizard brains don't generally have much of a cortex, its mostly amygdala. They are only trainable in the most rudimentary fashion. Alligators, if you feed them often enough, will form an association between your basic shape and food. They then become more likely to attempt to eat you.

[peekaloo]

11. Amy G Dala sounds like a good screen name for that other site.

}(

[Dash87]

13. I highly doubt this study.

Especially considering "Conservative" and "Liberal" are not concrete, as in many people have views from each side, and most people are moderates. Political philosophies are also based on learned ideas and experiences. :)

My opinion: :thumbsdown:

[meow mix]

20. ive also seen studies that show every facet of our personalities is genetic

even in determining the smallest details of our preferance.. i dont doubt this.

[JDPriestly]

96. It is not all genetic.

Early childhood experiences make a huge difference in personality. Ask any observant mother. Different approaches to feeding a baby and to toilet training can make a difference in a child's personality.

Those are just two factors. Whether you read to a child or not makes a big difference not just in the child's reading development but also in how well the child's attention span is developed and how the child constructs stories from memories and organizes thoughts and ideas.

[MisterP]

99. was the study connected to the Pioneer Fund? nt

[defendandprotect]

116. You really want to say that poverty is genetic?

Because I'm sure that shortly they'll be telling us they've found a

"poverty" gene --

[meow mix]

135. i dont know about any of that..

but twins seperated at birth show bizzare amounts of similarity, in thier general preferance of things. being raised thousand miles apart they do the same exact things.

[defendandprotect]

145. That's true ... but being impoverished is not something genetic ....

it's caused by economic systems which reward the few while stealing

from the many -- like Capitalism, for instance.

Twins, or instance, may have altruistic natures -- selecting teaching as a profession,

let's say. At one time a highly respected professsion. Today, under attack by

Obama/Duncan with public education under fierce attack along with teachers and their union.

Is the fault in their stars? Or in the cards of a corrupt and criminal economic system?



MY WISHES FOR PEACE AND LOVE FOR US ALL IN THE NEW YEAR !!

[Rozlee]

50. I agree. It also doesn't explain the large chunks of geographic liberal "groups" and

"conservative" groups. The Blue Staters and Red Staters. If the study was correct, wouldn't more intermingling be seen within those sectors and not as a majority of one or the other within them? I really don't see how most people from South Carolina can measure with most people from Vermont in a study like this.

[AngryAmish]

59. The way people vote is not representative of their personal views many times

Do you think Chicago city employees are all liberals? They are not. Generalizing but they are very racist, completely homophobic and many things we don't like. But they vote 100% democratic. Why? Their jobs depend on it and there is no other alternative. We group identify and political affiliation is the same as racial, religious and other identifications.

[jeff47]

65. Why would you expect interbreeding?

People tend to couple with those that share their political beliefs. So if there is some genetic component that causes political beliefs, that will tend to get reinforced as people who share that trait have children.

Now, the real issue is applying the "conservative" and "liberal" labels to this study. Really they showed that people who's political beliefs are based on fear tend to have one physical trait in their brain. At the moment, conservatives are using fear-based politics, so people with this trait are going to label themselves "conservatives". But the party label is independent of the tactics.

[valerief]

90. And damaged right temporal lobes. nt

[RC]

120. This is not really new information

You can tell Liberals from Conservatives with brain scans. Different areas of the brain light up when given the same information.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

14. Do the anterior cingulates also control spelling ability?

Repugs and teabaggers just seem to have more mis-spelled signage. And nobody in the group seems to notice.

:hi:

[Dawgs]

16. It's called evolution.

:)

[NYMdaveNYI]

130. +1000

[Joanne98]

17. They're thin skinned!

"The anterior cingulate is a part of the brain that is on the middle surface of the brain at the front and we found that the thickness of the grey matter, where the nerve cells of neurons are, was thicker the more people described themselves as liberal or left wing and thinner the more they described themselves as conservative or right wing," he told the program.

[lonestarnot]

18. Very interesting!

[rasputin1952]

19. Probably correlates w/the thick skulls of RW'er's as well...

:D

[Orrex]

21. It was also determined that Conservatives' hearts are two sizes too small.

[johnnyplankton]

23. It sounds like a prank...

like "Scientists:Republicans Far More Likely to Be Douche Bags"

[Stevenmarc]

24. I thought it had to do with Skull Thickness

[lunatica]

26. Some people are just too dense to get it

[yodermon]

27. Nowhere in this article is "trauma" or "childhood" mentioned

And to state that the amygdala "determines" political leaning is a very shortsighted interpretation. It doesn't address how the amygdala got that way, and lets the reader infer that perhaps such individuals were "just born that way".

For example childhood abuse *causes* damage to the amygdala.

http://www.snapnetwork.org/psych_effects/how_abuse_andneglect.htm

Abuse also damages the amygdala, an almond-shaped cluster of nuclei located in the brain's emotional control center that enables us to respond quickly to danger - say, to step out of the way of a swerving car. But repeated abuse causes the amygdala to signal danger even when there is no apparent threat.

Dr. Bruce Perry, a neuroscientist who heads the nonprofit research center, the Child Trauma Academy in Houston, said: ''A maladaptive amygdala makes an abused child recoil in fear at the drop of a hat.''

and
http://www.kidspeace.org/healing.aspx?id=2514

Lack of attachment in infancy can result in physical structural damage on the amygdala and limbic functions, as seen in lesion studies. Childhood trauma in the form of neglect and/or abuse can cause neurobiological changes in the amygdala, septal nuclei and hippocampus. Studies show that these areas are stunted and smaller, and, depending on how other areas of the brain are affected, this can have wide-ranging effects, according to Dr. R. Joseph. Infants exposed to extreme levels of arousal (corticotropin, noradrenaline, adrenaline levels in the brain) – too low in case of neglect, too high in case of abuse – experience an extended period of negative emotional state, overall disorganization and the de-regulation of homeostasis. This was discussed in studies by A. Schore in 2001 and M. Solomon and D. Siegel in 2003.

“The single most significant distinguishing feature of all nervous tissue – of neurons – is that they are designed to change in response to external signals,” wrote Bruce Perry, et al., in a 1995 article in Infant Mental Health Journal. This is what allows the organism to survive, and it is also the reason why trauma can damage structures/processes in the brain. Research shows that neurochemical changes in the brain occur as a result of trauma and as evidenced in autonomic or behavioral symptoms such as elevated heart rate, changes in blood pressure, changes in norepinephrine and epinephrine levels, the storage of emotional memories and behaviors associated with fear and anxiety, according to E. Osuch et al., in 2004. Epinephrine levels in cooperation with the amygdala assist in the storage of intensely experienced memories in the hippocampus.

Implicit memories (those that are difficult to describe but are easily “felt” or “known”) are stored differently from regular memories (those that can be recalled easily and told as a story) and appear to be stored in different sides of the limbic system, J. Bacon explained in June 2008. Traumatic memories are often stored as implicit memories, especially those that occurred early in life. The amygdala is involved in the process of how these memories are categorized and stored.Exposure to trauma (particularly chronic exposure) not only has an effect on emotional regulation processes in the brain, but also on the ability to process the memories of those events. The unnatural storage of traumatic memory has an impact on one’s ability to handle future exposure to adverse situations. The circuits in the brain are less connected to the frontal lobes, where thinking and considering can mitigate the emotional reaction, leaving the amygdala on its own to evaluate the threat, J. Bacon added. Without the mitigating effects of executive functioning, the limbic system activates fight/flight response in the brain stem, causing an inability to regulate or cope with an overwhelming flood of emotion.

[Thor_MN]

38. Implicit memories....

I wonder if that is the cause of some of the most frustrating moments of my life where I have been told that I was wrong by my conservative female family memebers. They were completly unable to verbalize WHY they think I was wrong, I "just was." No amount of proof or evidence was sufficient to counter their declaration "Your wrong" - and they could offer nothing to back their position.

Someone primarily motivated by fear would experience more as trauma, trending towards storing the memories as implicit memories and increasing their inability to verbalize a belief based on that memory. The "aphasia" of those beliefs could lead to anger when forced to defend them, leading to the "Piss off, your wrong" impasse that is so often the end game an arguement with a conservative.

[OnyxCollie]

43. Political leanings and world views are developed in early childhood.

I wrote a paper on this topic for a class I had. Here is part of the lit review:

“Behavior results from a process that involves, or functions as it entails, conscious
choice” (Monroe & Maher, 1995). These choices are developed through a method by which the
actor’s preferences are ordered and evaluated to determine which will provide the greatest utility
and what course of action should be taken to achieve them (Monroe & Maher, 1995). These
preferences include a predilection for survival (Chatterjee, 1972; Monroe & Maher, 1995).
Established and uniform, these preferences are shaped through the acquisition of information
(Jost et al., 2003) from opinion leaders whose function is to attach idea-elements together
(Converse, 1964).

This process of acquiring information from authoritative sources to satisfy preferences
which include survival is described as laying the foundation for a belief system (Converse, 1964;
Kruglanski & Thompson, 1999a, 1999b as cited in Jost et al., 2003; McGuire, 1985, as cited in
Jost et al., 2003). Converse (1964) and Kunda (1990, as cited in Jost et al., 2003) suggest that
this belief system is regulated by multiple constraints. The constraints offer a probability that a
specific attitude held in a belief system will result in certain other attitudes being held (Converse,
1964). These constraints are identified as logical, psychological, and social (Converse, 1964).
Jost et al. (2003) further expand on the concept by describing these constraints as existential
(fear, curiosity), epistemic (authoritarian, liberal), and ideological (group dominance,
egalitarianism). According to Jost et al. (2003), belief systems fulfill psychological needs.

Within the constraints, belief systems provide a principled doctrine by which new
information obtained is compared to prior associations in order to choose a course which
provides the greatest utility (Jost et al., 2003). However, these belief systems do not operate in a
vacuum; uncertain conditions and numerous variables can influence personal motivations by
invoking emotional responses, leading to a reformulation of logic that while not syllogistically
sound, is principled nonetheless (Jost et al., 2003).

Information gathering in early childhood requires the formation of relationships (Weber
& Federico, 2007). Attachment theory states that relationships are sought in order to reduce
anxiety and provide a sense of security (Sroufe & Waters, 1977, as cited in Weber & Federico,
2007). Successful proximity-seeking efforts create a secure attachment style, inspiring selfconfidence,
curiosity and an openness to new experiences (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall,
1978, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007). Failed proximity-seeking efforts result in anxiety
stemming from the lack of security, compounded by distress over the failure to establish a
relationship (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003, as cited in Weber and Federico, 2007). Recurring
failure or inconsistency (Ainsworth et al., 1978, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) in
proximity-seeking efforts creates two insecure attachment styles; anxious and avoidant (Weber &
Federico, 2007).

Anxious attachment style is associated with fixations on proximity-seeking and emotional
support (Weber & Federico, 2007). Avoidant attachment style abandons proximity-seeking and
instead relies on self-dependence to control anxiety (Weber & Federico, 2007). Brennan, Clark,
& Shaver (1998, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) have determined that anxious and avoidant
attachment styles in adults manifest themselves as either elevated states of arousal with a fixation
on close relationships, or as an emotional disconnect with an aversion to close relationships,
respectively.

Duckitt (2001, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) proposes that childrearing practices
lead to the development of personality traits which endorse world views that form ideology.
Children who have attained a secure attachment style are open to new information more than
those with either of the two insecure attachment styles (Cassidy, 1986, as cited in Weber &
Federico, 2007), as well as being less dogmatic and less reliant on ethnic stereotypes
(Mikulincer, 1997, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007). Additionally, Mikulincer & Florian
(2000, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) have shown that secure attachment styles “mitigate
the effect of mortality salience on the denigration of moral transgressors” (p. 394).

It has been demonstrated that children who have attained insecure attachment styles later
as adults develop Right Wing Authoritarian (RWA) ideologies, in which the world is viewed as a
dangerous place (Altemeyer, 1998; Duckitt & Fisher, 2003, as cited by Weber & Federico, 2007),
or Social Dominance Order (SDO) ideologies, in which the world is viewed as a competitive
jungle (Duckitt, 2001, as cited by Weber & Federico, 2007). RWA’s are defined by a deference to
authority figures, an endorsement of severe punishment by authority figures, and a high degree
of conventionalism (Altemeyer, 2006). SDO’s differ from RWA’s in that rather than embracing
authoritarianism as a means of protection against an out-group which threatens society, SDO’s
feel that society has already fallen and that only the strong shall survive, prompting group
domination, punishment, and humiliation against out-groups (Altemeyer, 1998). Altemeyer
(1998, as cited in Jost et al., 2003) and Pratto, Sidanious, Stallworth & Malle (1994, as cited in
Jost et al., 2003) have shown that SDO’s correlate with Republican party identification.

In response to criticism that scales of authoritarianism neglected left-wing personalities,
Rokeach (1960, as cited in Jost et al., 2003) developed a scale of dogmatism which included
measures of logically contradictory beliefs and denial of contradictions in belief systems.
According to Rokeach:

All belief-disbelief systems serve two powerful and conflicting sets of
motives at the same time: the need for a cognitive framework to know
and to understand and the need to ward off threatening aspects of
reality. To the extent that the cognitive need to know is predominant
and the need to ward off threat is absent, open systems should
result. . . . But as the need to ward off threat becomes stronger, the
cognitive need to know should become weaker, resulting in more
closed belief systems (p. 67, as quoted in Jost et al., 2003, p. 346).

Thus, closed belief systems reduce ambiguity-induced anxiety by satisfying the need to know
(Rokeach, 1960, as cited in Jost et al., 2003).

Understanding of issues and concepts is dependent upon the strength of the connotation
associated with them, as well as effectiveness of the constraints by which the referred issues and
concepts operate (Converse, 1964). In his research, Converse (1964) tests the hypothesis that if
one idea-element in the belief system should change, an individual must either change his
position on the issue or change his position on the party. Examination reveals a majority of the
population sampled are unable to express an understanding of the constraints affecting political
parties and issues without being prompted by political elites (Converse, 1964). Furthermore, the
majority of the population view the treatment they and other groups received from political
parties as their primary means of identifying parties (Converse, 1964).

Altemeyer, B. (1998). The other “authoritarian personality.” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 47–92.
Altemeyer, B. (2006). The authoritarians. Manitoba: University of Manitoba.
Chatterjee, P. (1972). The classical balance of power theory. Journal of Peace Research, 9(1), 51-61.
Converse, P. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206–261). New York: Free Press.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339-375.
Monroe, K.R. & Maher, K.H. (1995). Psychology and rational actor theory. Political Psychology, 16(1), 1-21.
Weber, C., & Federico, C. M. (2007). Interpersonal attachment and patterns of belief. Political Psychology, 28(4), 389-416.

These guys have been researching the subject for a while.
http://www.neuropolitics.org/

[dixiegrrrrl]

60. Fascinating. And it rings true.

Interestingly, a model from Co-dependence Treatment is similar.
It says that are 2 basic types of dysfunctional family structure:

Chaotic, which is found where parents/caretakers have strong untreated substance abuse
or strong mental illness problems.

or

Rigid structure, most often found in military families with domineering fathers ( think The Great Santini)
or found in fundamentalist religious families.

the chaotic family is most likely to lead to "insecure attachment styles"
while the rigid family structure may lead to a fear based but 'secure attachment style".

Also interesting was a report showing that quite a few presidents were first born of these types of families.
think of Nixon, of Clinton, for example.

[saras]

142. Thank you

This is one of the few posts on this topic I actually found useful, rather than just amusing or comforting.

[Rozlee]

52. That might explain my earlier question about geographic differences

of those living in "conservative" areas and "liberal" areas. I really believe conservative Bible Belt Southerners are more abused. Belief in fundamentalist principals calls for harsh punishment and many Southerners grow with the sting of the rod. I may have to reassess my previous post if the question of abuse is taken into consideration. I really believe many of those living in the conservative Bible Belt are abused if raised with "Bible-centered" childhood rearing practices.

[LaurenG]

28. I love it but wonder what determines this?

Genetically I should be a hard right leaning hypocrite but I'm not. The one thing that is different that I can think of is level of education.

[Myrina]

29. ... there was an article earlier this week that said ...

... that those with 'bigger amygdala's' also tended to have larger social networks/friend skills ... why do I find this a contradiction?

(will search for article/link and post if I locate)

[OnyxCollie]

44. It's not a contradiction.

Information gathering in early childhood requires the formation of relationships (Weber
& Federico, 2007). Attachment theory states that relationships are sought in order to reduce
anxiety and provide a sense of security (Sroufe & Waters, 1977, as cited in Weber & Federico,
2007). Successful proximity-seeking efforts create a secure attachment style, inspiring selfconfidence,
curiosity and an openness to new experiences (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall,
1978, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007). Failed proximity-seeking efforts result in anxiety
stemming from the lack of security, compounded by distress over the failure to establish a
relationship (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003, as cited in Weber and Federico, 2007). Recurring
failure or inconsistency (Ainsworth et al., 1978, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) in
proximity-seeking efforts creates two insecure attachment styles; anxious and avoidant (Weber &
Federico, 2007).

Anxious attachment style is associated with fixations on proximity-seeking and emotional
support (Weber & Federico, 2007). Avoidant attachment style abandons proximity-seeking and
instead relies on self-dependence to control anxiety (Weber & Federico, 2007). Brennan, Clark,
& Shaver (1998, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) have determined that anxious and avoidant
attachment styles in adults manifest themselves as either elevated states of arousal with a fixation
on close relationships, or as an emotional disconnect with an aversion to close relationships,
respectively.

[Igel]

109. And yet "social network" and "fixation on close relationships"

are very different things.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/12/social-networking-amygdala/

In both cases we see a correlation. In the case where the evidence would favor conservatives and say that perhaps we liberals aren't the ones we've been waiting for, we ardently point out that correlation is not causation. In the case where the evidence serves to show how wonderful we are, well then, correlation most certainly is causation.

Let's have a rousing round of applause for confirmation bias.

This is more likely to be the case: Both of the consequences result from some set of primitives that result from the structure of the amygdala, and both are emergent. Social networking and fear avoidance may both be tied into the same root behavior, they may not be. Networks can be simple and have a lot of very interesting and divergent properties. In any event, neither, given their prevalence, are likely to be strongly selected out by evolution. Since it's false that every property needs to contribute positively to survival it's best to view evolution as usually involving negative constraints. Phrase in those terms, either property is driven to extermination (even if it should be there may be some other emergent property that is more important for survival).

Moreover, while social networking can mean a lot of different things so can "conservativism." If you have a factor that selects for 20 divergent criteria (most of which, to be honest, are also present in liberalism but just differently ranked) then you really have a really powerful explanation. The problem with really powerful explanations is that they *over* explain: They do not just account for the original observed data, but they easily account for replacement when that data is shown to be in error, and account for data that contradicts the second set of data. At first it explains just what the researchers like (usually also a give-away that the theory or explanation is suspiciously convenient.) Such theories are like God: It explains everything--and therefore explains nothing, but usually the explanation is just what we always believed they would be, even when we were in high school. This kind of research yields explanation that aren't all-powerful, and most researchers are smart enough (even if science reporters aren't), but it still often explains too much and the limits are imposed not by the structure of the explanation but by the willingness of the explainer to exploit the theory.

[barbtries]

30. i would have expected them

to discover extremely thick HEADS in rightwingers. at least the ones who cannot recognize when they're voting against their own best interests.

[Cetacea]

31. "A primitive part of the brain..."

Those who know about a certain site will be amused at the poetic justice of that description...

The real "Primitives".

[musette_sf]

49. +1

I always saw that monicker as the apex of projection.

[Javaman]

32. I wonder how these findings associate with the "fight or flight" response?

:shrug:

are tough guy right wingers who live in fear the first to turn tail in a crisis situation?

[Roy Rolling]

33. Perfect sense

Now, there is scientific evidence that neocons are thick-headed.

[eShirl]

34. "It was commissioned as a light-hearted experiment by actor Colin Firth"

" Talking about the experiment, he said: "I took this on as a fairly frivolous exercise: I just decided to find out what was biologically wrong with people who don't agree with me and see what scientists had to say about it and they actually came up with something." "



:rofl: @ "find out what was biologically wrong with people who don't agree with me"

[Thor_MN]

35. Is the "Fight or Flight" processing is responsible for the binary thinking of conservatives?

The constant "with us/against us" tendencies of conservatives drive me up the wall. No solution is even remotely possible unless it solves every aspect of the problem (exception, thier idea, esp. if they can make money off it). No shades of gray are allowed, no partial solutions. They would rather let people die than take action to start saving people as best you can. Everything needs more study (again unless there are ways to siphon money into their own pocket).

I believe trying to fit everything into a binary mindset also facilitates hypocrisy. It's the only way to make shades of gray work in their Black/White world. With time they become absolutely blind to their hypocrisy. Confront a conservative on contradictory statements they have made and they will look at you like you have grown a third eye in your forehead - they are totally unable to confront the possibility that they have ever made a mistake, or explain why one statement is different than the other.

[msanthrope]

37. I can't tell the difference between real news and what should be on the Onion anymore. n/t

[Number_Six]

39. And nowhere was it said...

...that all of this tends to create a serious accumulation of fecal matter all throughout the entire body, if one is "wired" to the right.

Hmm. Maybe next study?

[Hugin]

41. I have a thicker anterior cingulates!

:patriot:

There's a tee-shirt slogan in there somewhere.

[JBoy]

42. I always thought it was their medulla oblongata that made them ornery.

Like alligators

[BobbyBoring]

71. No Alligators are awnrey

Because they have all those teeth and no tooth brush!!

My momma said, my momma, my momma said~

[orbitalman]

45. What about Liberal conversionism??

Does the brain change shape? What about growing up in and embracing a conservative environment and over the years, rejecting it and totally converting to liberalism? That's me. :shrug:

[reggie the dog]

89. I did the same thing

grew up in the conservative suburbs of chicago, went to UIC and by my third year there was a far left liberal.

[L0oniX]

46. This is why they like Fux/Beck and his crying ...and it's why they respond so well to fear.

[Judi Lynn]

103. Truly! What looks like a total fraud, idiot, and lunatic to us is a superstar to them. n/t

[tjwash]

47. WTF? This kind of crap is front page stuff now?

This website has slid so far downhill its not even funny anymore...it is just plain sad.

[TalkingDog]

51. Primitive Fear Brain vs Rational Cognitive Empathic Brain

Anterior cingulate plays a role in a wide variety of autonomic functions, such as regulating blood pressure and heart rate, as well as rational cognitive functions, such as reward anticipation, decision-making, empathy and emotion.


vs

In complex vertebrates, including humans, the amygdalae perform primary roles in the formation and storage of memories associated with emotional events. Research indicates that, during fear conditioning, sensory stimuli reach the basolateral complexes of the amygdalae, particularly the lateral nuclei, where they form associations with memories of the stimuli. The association between stimuli and the aversive events they predict may be mediated by long-term potentiation, a sustained enhancement of signalling between affected neurons.

[Hugin]

53. Lizard brains!

This part is also quite facinating... "regulating blood pressure and heart rate". Because they use a different part of their brains explains the vein standing out on almost all Right Winger's foreheads constantly.

Tell me again why they're against Health Care for All? :crazy:

[TalkingDog]

54. Lizards eat other lizards.

No empathy.

[Downwinder]

55. The Neanderthal Gene??? n/t

[Skelly]

57. Waiting on the Peer Review

It should be interesting. I would have more confidence in the study had it come from another University. Ethics 101 teaches to always look at WHO is asked to do the research. Choosing a University that is rooted in liberal theory to discover what they did is akin to choosing Bob Jones University to discover the existence of God.

However, assuming the study does have merit, what then does this mean? Will it lead to more tolerance of political differences knowing that some people (and their political views) are just "born that way"?

[TexasProgresive]

61. So are there fundamental brain changes in those who

go from being rabid conservatives to liberals or vice versa?

[RKP5637]

64. That's an interesting question, which came first ... n/t

[RKP5637]

62. Recommend!!! n/t

[bergie321]

63. So....

Is there a cure?

[social_critic]

70. My research shows something similar with bone structure

I am a PhD candidate in biometrics, and I have been comparing the bone structure of registered Republicans from Texas and Registered Democrats from California. The bone structure is quite different. The Texas Republicans have heavier bones, longer cubitus and radius, and a shorter femur.

A fellow researcher is almost finished and ready to publish a report showing Republicans have larger, thicker molars, suited to chew on thick bones and hard nuts, these traits seem to be related to australopithecus boisei.

[woo me with science]

73. The news-reported "conclusion" from a study like this

is a caricature of an incredibly crude guess based on findings that could mean lots of things.

It is like reading phrenology.

If you talked to the researchers, what they would say about what you can actually conclude would be considerably different.

[Fearless]

74. The brain like a muscle adapts to where it is used most...

There was a famous example a few years back regarding London taxi drivers and having an abnormally large part of the brain. It was determined it was because they used that part to recall where things were in the very complex city. I figure the same is true here. Those who are conservative use one part of the brain more and those who are liberal see things differently using a different area of the brain.

[Emillereid]

75. Perhaps we're evolving into different species? I used to be able to talk to

Republicans (1960s) -- we usually started more or less from the same set of facts, but differed regarding our approach to them. And then they seemed to change into people who I just couldn't talk to anymore. They lived in some fact free, made up stuff, parallel universe filled with rage and intense hatred for anything 'Democratic.'I am not suggesting that physical evolution can happen in just a generation, but the basic characteristics and world views of tea-baggers borders on complete insanity.

[dballance]

76. More Proof They are Thick-Headed.

[whistler162]

78. NASP of S

Not Another Stupid Piece of S**T

[ItNerd4life]

79. DUers show their intelligence by believing crap like this.

Intelligent people don't belittle people who disagree with them, they try to educate and convert them.

[valerief]

92. Playing with the results of the study is not "believing" it. Considering that the results of the

study may be true is not "belittling" anyone. Methinks you're responding far too emotionally to the study.

[pnorman]

80. Amygdala & Reptilian Brain

http://www.crystalinks.com/reptilianbrain.html

[MNBrewer]

82. Conservatism is a chosen "life-style"

People aren't "born conservative", and they shouldn't get special rights because of those choices.

[Buzz Clik]

83. Hm. My observation is that a radical political stance is associated with thin skin.

You don't need an MRI for confirmation.

[OregonBlue]

85. "I took this on as a fairly frivolous exercise: I just decided to find out what was biologically

wrong with people who don't agree with me and see what scientists had to say about it and they actually came up with something."

What a hoot!!!:rofl: :rofl:

[DesertDiamond]

86. Makes sense. Right wingers are clearly more vulnerable to manipulation via their emotions...

Propaganda is exactly the manipulation of emotions, and the real reason why the right wing talk radio phenomenon does not have a left wing counterpart, not just lack of funding... Propaganda hits a right wingers brain and goes straight in, while it hits a left winger's brain and she or he thinks, "??... that doesn't make sense." But even if we were to have radio that repeated truths all day long, we'd bore of it quickly. "Okay, okay, they're repeating themselves. Point made. Let's move on to other important info."

Also, back to the funding issue, advertising works better on people who are emotionally vulnerable. So naturally, simply from a business standpoint, sponsors will get more for their buck from a right wing radio show.

[alfredo]

87. I have asked my conservative associates why they are so fearful?

They seem to be afraid of everything, and are armed to the teeth just in case.

[rug]

94. There's something familiar about the amygdala.

[Kingofalldems]

95. Totally the opposite of what pigboy Limbaugh says about us

He projects liberals as being controlled by emotion.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

98. Limpbaugh has no prefrontal cortex

[felix_numinous]

100. The old nurture vs. nature debate

we still don't know to what degree brain activity shapes brain structure, or to what degree congenital differences shape behavior. In other words, do we know how elastic the brain is, if it can change shape according to changes in behavior or environmental factors? I think it is both nurture and nature, to some degree.

This is an interesting subject. Just as long as Dr Evil Strangelove Feelgood Mengele doesn't get ahold of the research :evilfrown: or we will all be toast.

[robcon]

101. Unscientific garbage.

The size of parts of the brain have absolutely nothing to do with their functions or the dominance of those functions among humans.

[NoodleyAppendage]

121. BULLSHIT. Ask anyone with Alzheimer's disease or Parkinson's weather size is irrelevant.

Gray matter thickness plays an important part in both illness pathology, as well as behavioral traits. Back to biological psychology 101 with you.

J

[robcon]

137. Your ignoranceorance of pathology/anatomy is understandable, but pathetic.

I think you WANT this to be true, so you'll accept any 'scientific' basis for your beliefs.

[NoodleyAppendage]

138. Ph.D. in neuroscience, buddy. Move along now. n/t

J

[valerief]

124. Because...

[madisongrace]

140. Are you sure about that? No grey area?

I don't know you, but I would consider this to be black/white thinking... no room for discussion. I find that type of thinking among conservative people that I know.

[certainot]

107. this study is off the mark.

actually sex on the wrong brain is what happened: humans evolved in a natural environment with no certainty. things were fine until 'civilization' and larger populations required humans to delay the age of reproduction. the later the acceptable age of marriage, the more the masturbation.

by default that usually happened with the tool and hammer hand, the right hand. the more repressive the culture/religion the more masturbating went on. unfortunately the right hand is connected to the left logical /mathematical side of the brain where sex energy is satisfied in terms of certitude and magnitude (greed). the left hand is the hand connected to the creative orgasmic side of the brain. hence the conservative mind, in which studies show a common need to avoid uncertainty (need certainty). uncertainty causes fear in proportion to the need for certainty and since there is no certainty it must be created- hence more organized religion and all the denial of reality that comes with it. the amygdala actually reacts to uncertaity and evolved as a half-way station or distribution depot for excess sex energy so that it can be stored and injected as needed into the creative right side to make up and rationalize the denial of reality that is needed to create certainty in a natural environment and reduce the fear. the pleasure centers get some of that energy at the same time and that's the pleasure that absolute certainty brings, even when completely fucking wrong.

Here's the short version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnrfuTUlqVs

Here's a more detailed version:
http://sexonthewwrongbrain.org

[felix_numinous]

110. So we should

be masturbating with our left hands? Sorry the first link was unintelligible and the second didn't work for me.

If all our problems could be solved this easy....

[certainot]

117. you never know...

[alp227]

112. I think this study or something like this was discussed on Thom Hartmann today

Thom was interviewing Dan Gainor from the Business and Media Institute on the topic "are conservatives wired to be afraid?" Given all the emotional appeals by the Fox News hosts and radio hosts this study somehow makes sense. Be cautious though: correlation does not necessarily imply causation.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

113. I find studies like this fascinating

My family lives in an extremely conservative area and has business partners, neighbors and relatives who are the total opposite of us in their views about pretty much everything.

Some of these people don't even vote and are not interested in politics, but you can bring up any subject and they will see it totally different than we do. We have come to the conclusion it must be something physically different in their brains. Also we have people locally who, even though they were raised in the same tiny town, went to the same school, same church, raised by the same family, see the world like we do; from a liberal view point.

We have concluded it must be their brains.

[earth mom]

114. No surprise-I've long thought most rethugs are sociopaths with dysfunctional brains. nt

[MilesColtrane]

115. I'm no brainy, scientist-man, but I called this one six months ago.

Pretty obvious...


http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8542832&mesg_id=8543026

[Downwinder]

122. Completely different take.

Study ties brain structure size to socializing

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/9428271

[forty6]

134. Nothing wrong with the old "nature nurture" argument here.

We have a certain sized brain because we exercised it in a certain way, or it had a propensity to grow in a certain way due to genetics.

Both parts of the argument are still open for testing and confirmation.

Fact is: Dumb Republicans are dumb for a reason.

[BrklynLiberal]

125. HAH! I was right! I posted a while back that there was a genetic difference!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=439&topic_id=64951#66894

[underpants]

126. We do all realize that RW radio will call liberals "thick brained" don't we??

[toddwv]

127. Oh good, now that we have a test for this condition

maybe we can start early diagnosis and treatment.

[hughee99]

129. So (if the study is true) repukes are no longer evil, uncaring, and immoral..

They are born that way, they can't help it.

[NYMdaveNYI]

PRIMITIVE, you say?

[NYMdaveNYI]

131. PRIMITIVE, you say?

[forty6]

133. I always knew there were pieces missing in the illogical arguments of

right wingers.

Now there's proof!

[Ticonderoga]

136. Huh that's funny,

I would have laid money on it being more of a thickness of the skull issue.

[mvd]

139. I'll use this one to conteract..

someone who keeps using that biased Pew poll on IQ. K&R. Plus, there was that study about liberals and atheists having higher intelligence. I'm not an Atheist, but I'm not dogmatically religious either.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

141. How do they explain people who change their political views over time?

This just seems like another attempt to promote generalizations and prejudice against other people.

[bluesmail]

143. It's collectively all your life's experiences. From baby. To Toddler. To adolescent.

To young adult. To young grown adult. To ... To ... Okay. Givin up.

[earcandle]

148. Great Timing...

http://www.fastcompany.com/1712971/google-and-george-clooney-employ-commercial-satellites-amid-sudans-referendum

[Name removed]

154. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.