Liberals are smarter

[Blind groper]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 132655.htm

The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health found that, among 20,000 test subjects, there was a positive correlation between IQ and liberalism.

In other words, liberals are smarter than rednecks.

[Blind groper]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18181782

A British study compared general intelligence and educational achievement to liberal versus non liberal attitudes. The finding was that the more intelligent and better educated people were, on the whole much more liberal.

Liberal people are smarter than rednecks.

[Blind groper]

Two economists, Bryan Caplan and Stephen Miller, took data from the National Social Survey, and found a correlation between intelligence and openness to immigration, free trade, and a reluctance to endorse government make-work projects, protectionist policies, and business interventionism. In other words, the high IQ was associated with a more liberal attitude.

Liberals are smarter.

I ask, is the corrolary true. Are rednecks stupid?

[piscator]

Are you using the Canadian usage?

[Blind groper]

Liberal in this sense is political, meaning favouring individual liberty, free trade, and moderate political and social reform. The opposite is conservative.

So I probably should have said : "Are conservatives stupid?" Rather than : "Are rednecks stupid?"

I apologise for the error.

[Seth]

Two economists, Bryan Caplan and Stephen Miller, took data from the National Social Survey, and found a correlation between intelligence and openness to immigration, free trade, and a reluctance to endorse government make-work projects, protectionist policies, and business interventionism. In other words, the high IQ was associated with a more liberal attitude.

Liberals are smarter.

I ask, is the corrolary true. Are rednecks stupid?

Dunno, but it doesn't sound like "liberalism" to me, it sounds like "Libertarianism."

I'd like to see where "liberals" fall on the spectrum when you add in support for socialistic concepts such as "you pay me to sit on my ass and not riot."

[Brian Peacock]

Liberals are smarter? Nah. All right-thinking people know that Seth proved that as logical fallacy decades ago by pointing out that smart Liberals always think that Liberals are smarter.


And besides. Liberals ain't smarter, conservatives are just scaredicats.

Conservatives Big on Fear, Brain Study Finds

Peering inside the brain with MRI scans, researchers at University College London found that self-described conservative students had a larger amygdala than liberals. The amygdala is an almond-shaped structure deep in the brain that is active during states of fear and anxiety. Liberals had more gray matter at least in the anterior cingulate cortex, a region of the brain that helps people cope with complexity.

The results are not that surprising as they fit in with conclusions from other studies. Just a year ago, researchers from Harvard and UCLA San Diego reported finding a "liberal" gene. This gene had a tiny effect, however, and worked only for adolescents having many friends. The results also mesh with psychological studies on conflict monitoring.

What It Means
There is a big unknown underlying these findings. Supposing that the size of one's amygdala really does increase the likelihood of being a conservative. Is the size of the amygdala determined at birth, or does it perhaps increase with frightening childhood experiences, such as authoritarian parenting and corporal punishment?

Similarly, one might ask whether the gray matter difference is affected by exposure to educational challenge, social diversity, or childhood cognitive enrichment.

The born versus acquired perspective on political attitudes is important to psychologists. After all, if political proclivities are fixed at birth in terms of brain anatomy, there is little hope of change. Most of us would probably like to see a world in which political attitudes were less polarized, and more changeable, but that may be a pipe dream.

Meanwhile, the neuro-scientific fact of two very different political creatures helps clarify much of the political antics of modern democracies.

Most societies are divided into a party that wants change (the more liberal party) and one that is afraid of change (the conservatives). The liberal party is generally more intellectual and the conservative party is more anti-intellectual.

The conservative party is big on national defense and magnifies our perception of threat, whether of foreign aggressors, immigrants, terrorists, or invading ideologies like Communism. To a conservative, the world really is a frightening place.

Given that their brains are so different, it is hardly surprising that liberals and conservatives should spend so much time talking across each other and never achieving real dialog or consensus.

As scientists we hope that these results are replicated because they shed so much light on political behavior. As citizens, we would prefer if politicians were not divided into such different categories of political animal...

-- read on dear reader, read on --

Unconscious Reactions Separate Liberals and Conservatives

BLUE STATE, red state. Big government, big business. Gay rights, fetal rights. The United States is riven by the politics of extremes. To paraphrase humor columnist Dave Barry, Republicans think of Democrats as godless, unpatriotic, Volvo-driving, France-loving, elitist latte guzzlers, whereas Democrats dismiss Republicans as ignorant, NASCAR-obsessed, gun-fondling religious fanatics. An exaggeration, for sure, but the reality is still pretty stark. Congress is in a perpetual stalemate because of the two parties' inability to find middle ground on practically anything.

According to the experts who study political leanings, liberals and conservatives do not just see things differently. They are different—in their personalities and even their unconscious reactions to the world around them. For example, in a study published in January, a team led by psychologist Michael Dodd and political scientist John Hibbing of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln found that when viewing a collage of photographs, conservatives' eyes unconsciously lingered 15 percent longer on repellent images, such as car wrecks and excrement—suggesting that conservatives are more attuned than liberals to assessing potential threats.

Meanwhile examining the contents of 76 college students' bedrooms, as one group did in a 2008 study, revealed that conservatives possessed more cleaning and organizational items, such as ironing boards and calendars, confirmation that they are orderly and self-disciplined. Liberals owned more books and travel-related memorabilia, which conforms with previous research suggesting that they are open and novelty-seeking.

“These are not superficial differences. They are psychologically deep,” says psychologist John Jost of New York University, a co-author of the bedroom study. “My hunch is that the capacity to organize the political world into left or right may be a part of human nature.”

Although conservatives and liberals are fundamentally different, hints are emerging about how to bring them together—or at least help them coexist. In his recent book The Righteous Mind, psychologist Jonathan Haidt of the N.Y.U. Stern School of Business argues that liberals and conservatives need not revile one another as immoral on issues such as birth control, gay marriage or health care reform. Even if these two worldviews clash, they are equally grounded in ethics, he writes. Meanwhile studies by Jost and others suggest that political views reside on a continuum that is mediated in part by universal human emotions such as fear. Under certain circumstances, everyone can shift closer to the middle—or drift further apart.

The Fear Factor

Psychologists have found that conservatives are fundamentally more anxious than liberals, which may be why they typically desire stability, structure and clear answers even to complicated questions. “Conservatism, apparently, helps to protect people against some of the natural difficulties of living,” says social psychologist Paul Nail of the University of Central Arkansas. “The fact is we don't live in a completely safe world. Things can and do go wrong. But if I can impose this order on it by my worldview, I can keep my anxiety to a manageable level.”

Anxiety is an emotion that waxes and wanes in all of us, and as it swings up or down our political views can shift in its wake. When people feel safe and secure, they become more liberal; when they feel threatened, they become more conservative. Research conducted by Nail and his colleague in the weeks after September 11, 2001, showed that people of all political persuasions became more conservative in the wake of the terrorist attacks. Meanwhile, in an upcoming study, a team led by Yale University psychologist Jaime Napier found that asking Republicans to imagine that they possessed superpowers and were impermeable to injury made them more liberal. “There is some range within which people can be moved,” Jost says....

-- go on, treat yourself to some science --

[JimC]

Gin drinkers are smarter.

[Blind groper]

Liberals tend be more accepting of change and of unorthodox things. This may be related to a higher level of anxiety and fear related to change in the conservative mind. But the studies I quoted certainly showed that, on average, liberals are smarter.

[Brian Peacock]

Okay then. Liberals ain't smarter, they're the norm reference. It's conservatives who are dummer.

[Seth]

Liberals are smarter? Nah. All right-thinking people know that Seth proved that as logical fallacy decades ago by pointing out that smart Liberals always think that Liberals are smarter.


And besides. Liberals ain't smarter, conservatives are just scaredicats.



[quote="Psychology Today"

The Fear Factor

Psychologists have found that conservatives are fundamentally more anxious than liberals, which may be why they typically desire stability, structure and clear answers even to complicated questions. “Conservatism, apparently, helps to protect people against some of the natural difficulties of living,” says social psychologist Paul Nail of the University of Central Arkansas. “The fact is we don't live in a completely safe world. Things can and do go wrong. But if I can impose this order on it by my worldview, I can keep my anxiety to a manageable level.”

Anxiety is an emotion that waxes and wanes in all of us, and as it swings up or down our political views can shift in its wake. When people feel safe and secure, they become more liberal; when they feel threatened, they become more conservative. Research conducted by Nail and his colleague in the weeks after September 11, 2001, showed that people of all political persuasions became more conservative in the wake of the terrorist attacks. Meanwhile, in an upcoming study, a team led by Yale University psychologist Jaime Napier found that asking Republicans to imagine that they possessed superpowers and were impermeable to injury made them more liberal. “There is some range within which people can be moved,” Jost says....

What this says to me is that conservatives are better adapted to managing both risk and anxiety, whereas liberals have an unrealistic and utopian view of life that makes them vulnerable to taking unwarranted Darwinian risks because they think they "possess superpowers and [are] impermeable to injury."

This comports nicely with the idiotic liberal notions that everybody ought to enjoy equality of outcomes, no matter what risks they take and how little labor they actually perform. They evidently think that they are entitled to a cushy life at other people's expense and that someone else should care for them, whereas conservatives understand the realities of life and know that they must provide for themselves if they hope to survive.

That's why "preppers" are usually of a conservative bent. They know that if the shit hits the fan nobody else is going to take care of them. Liberals, on the other hand, particularly the dependent class liberals, are denying reality and therefore will die very quickly if suddenly forced to care for themselves. To wit: Tens of thousands of dependent-class persons stuck in the football stadium in New Orleans and many who stayed behind during Katrina who didn't have basic survival skills because they were not scared enough to learn how.

I think that puts conservatives at the top of the evolutionary heap in this respect.

[Seth]

Liberals tend be more accepting of change and of unorthodox things. This may be related to a higher level of anxiety and fear related to change in the conservative mind. But the studies I quoted certainly showed that, on average, liberals are smarter.

This falsely presumes that acceptance of "change" ad "unorthodox things" is a positive for humanity's survival. That ain't necessarily so. One glaring example might be the acceptance of "change" in sexual behavior caused by acceptance of "unorthodox" homosexual sexual practices, which factually lead to the AIDS epidemic.

Not all "change" is good. Just look what that fuckwit Obama has "changed" in his "change" agenda. Nothing he's done has made life better for anyone, anywhere.

[laklak]

Smarter than what, a dinner plate?

[piscator]

Liberals tend be more accepting of change and of unorthodox things. This may be related to a higher level of anxiety and fear related to change in the conservative mind. But the studies I quoted certainly showed that, on average, liberals are smarter.

This falsely presumes that acceptance of "change" ad "unorthodox things" is a positive for humanity's survival. That ain't necessarily so. One glaring example might be the acceptance of "change" in sexual behavior caused by acceptance of "unorthodox" homosexual sexual practices, which factually lead to the AIDS epidemic.

Not all "change" is good. Just look what that fuckwit Obama has "changed" in his "change" agenda. Nothing he's done has made life better for anyone, anywhere.

What did George Bush do for you?

[JimC]

Ask not what George Bush can do for you, but what you can do for George Bush...