Brains of liberals, conservatives structured differently: study

[wyly]

Why - what about the statement you quoted doesn't compute ?

the brain does change throughout your life...

[wyly]

Oh, I see... ok... the brain changes and politics change... seems to make it harder to make absolute statements about these things, unless the topic is:

Brains of liberals, conservatives structured differently in 2011.

we behave in different ways, we learn in different ways, we think in different ways it isn't a big leap in logic to attribute those differences to the structure of the organ that is responsible for behaviour, learning and reasoning...brain injury can cause personality changes so why is it difficult to accept that a slightly different structure in a healthy brain will affect personality?...if the article had not mentioned an associated politically leaning but some other less contentious trait we wouldn't be having this discussion...if instead the study found that different brain structures were linked with superior physical ability or lack of abilties no one would question it...

[Michael Hardner]

... we learn in different ways, we think in different ways it isn't a big leap in logic to attribute those differences to the structure of the organ that is responsible for behaviour, learning and reasoning...brain injury can cause personality changes so why is it difficult to accept that a slightly different structure in a healthy brain will affect personality?...if the article had not mentioned an associated politically leaning but some other less contentious trait we wouldn't be having this discussion...if instead the study found that different brain structures were linked with superior physical ability or lack of abilties no one would question it...

Exactly - because these things are easier to quantify.

Political attitudes are more social and cultural.

[Wild Bill]

that would be incorrect, I know many many scientists and none of them is conservative....and there are surveys on voting trends to back that up...most obvious trend is 90%+ are atheists, hardly a conservative leaning...

How do you define a scientist? To me, it's someone involved with physics, chemistry or spinoffs of such disciplines.

To others its biology, geology or like Suzuki, botany!

There is a big difference between what a Feynman or Hawking studies and the practice of pressing leaves and flowers in a scrapbook...

[Wild Bill]

As mentioned in the OP, check out the free online copy of Altemeyer's study "The Authoritarians"....and leave something in the tip jar! Altemeyer and other cognitive psychologists, make a convincing case for connecting personal worldview with degrees of authoritarianism and openness. The study also shows fascinating tidbits such as how children raised by fundamentalist parents will be more likely to be authoritarian in adulthood, and how the experience of going to university makes young people exposed to new ideas and people from other places in the world, more open and less authoritarian in their thinking.

More open? Tell it to those Jewish speakers who were run out of town on a rail before they could speak at Queen's or U of Toronto, by "more open and less authoritarian" students!

[wyly]

How do you define a scientist? To me, it's someone involved with physics, chemistry or spinoffs of such disciplines.

To others its biology, geology or like Suzuki, botany!

There is a big difference between what a Feynman or Hawking studies and the practice of pressing leaves and flowers in a scrapbook...

there is no difference...your bias is apparently associated with the names you use to make your point, Suzuki an activist you dislike so his field of study DNA isn't a real science, how can you disdainfully equate pressing leaves to the study of DNA?...Hawking is not an activist so you approve and his field of study as a real science...geology, medicine, biology, archeology are all legitimate sciences... Edited April 10, 2011 by wyly

[wyly]

Exactly - because these things are easier to quantify.

Political attitudes are more social and cultural.

but as has already been demonstrated the brain adapts to what it is tasked with...you are born with potential already built in...life experiences can modify and develop those even further...

this is nature vs nurture debate, there isn't any doubt you have personalty traits built in from day one and nurture plays a part as well in personality...the contention is finding the point where the two meet...

[Bonam]

The brain builds new pathways and interconnections on a continuous basis throughout one's life. As you learn any new skill or knowledge or method of thinking, the brain physically changes to include the things you learned in its physical structure. The brain isn't like a computer, it doesn't have "software", there aren't just memory banks to which data can be written, or behaviors that can be changed by loading different information on the same pieces of hardware. The behaviors and thought patterns of a human are entirely dependent on the physical structure of that individual's brain, they are encoded in the hardware. The data is saved in the physical interconnections between neurons. So of course there will be differences in the brain structures of people accustomed to different modes of thinking, or who are specialists in different areas.

As for the results mentioned in the article linked to in the OP:

The functions of the brain parts mentioned in the study are not fully described in the news article. It claims that the anterior cingulate cortex, which was found to be larger in the self-reported liberals, is responsible for "processing conflicting information". That is not its only function, however. In fact, a quick look at wikipedia states the following:

The anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) is the frontal part of the cingulate cortex, that resembles a "collar" form around the corpus callosum, the fibrous bundle that relays neural signals between the right and left cerebral hemispheres of the brain. It includes both the ventral and dorsal areas of the cingulate cortex, and appears to play 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[1] and emotion.[2][3]

Interesting that that part isn't mentioned in the article. Certainly, I think the conservatives among us wouldn't argue with this finding, that leftists are more heavily influenced by empathy and emotion.

Edited April 10, 2011 by Bonam

[Pliny]

More open? Tell it to those Jewish speakers who were run out of town on a rail before they could speak at Queen's or U of Toronto, by "more open and less authoritarian" students!

Or the Teachers Union in Wisconsin?

What say to the argument that the major political parties are pretty much the same thing? It matters not who you vote for nothing changes much.

The author doesn't explain how anyone could change their political views or what happens when the centre of the political spectrum slides left. Does everyone's brain change? Are liberals defined as socialists? Or are they like myself, more classical liberals?

Established liberal institutions are just as authoritarian and conservative, if not moreso, than any conservative institutions. Take Canada's health care system as an example and try to bring change to that. You'll meet with a rather authoritarian resistance. And talk about fear.....messing with health care is the end of the world. The only welcome change is additional resources.

Many liberals here consider themselves centrists. Are they sort of "bi" as opposed to "hetero"?

Does this explain why many youthful liberals over time become conservatives?

I can't beleive intelligent people actually consider this to have valid conclusions and the author earned money writing it.

That liberals, with a socialist inclination, are more complex I will agree. They prefer things complicated. Maybe it's why there heads are swelled up.

Edited April 11, 2011 by Pliny

[WIP]

But it fails to explain why 'fundamentalist' 'authoritarian' and so on are somehow mapped to political parties. It's subjective to say that these things represent conservatives - there are plenty of conservatives who are not these things and there are leftists who are.

I already pointed that out in the OP that authoritarian movements can develop on the left, and I consider it likely we will see more militant marxist groups rising up as socialists and liberals lose faith in democratic institutions.

But, the minority of conservatives who are not authoritarian is the exception to the rule. Conservatism began as a political philosophy designed to preserve traditional social structures from change, and they've made their primary appeals to traditional values ever since.

All we have to do is look at is look at the Harper Conservatives here in Canada, and how they focus on militarism, building prisons, "family values", and as we are seeing with each new revelation -- a complete disregard for democratic principles. Political leaders always want power, but the difference between the Conservatives and the Liberals and the NDP, is what the supporters will put up with. The Conservatives have a core of supporters who don't even believe in democratic principles to start with. They believe in power and respect for authority.